Evolution Plus AI

The World Cup offside system tightened its detection from 50 centimeters to 10. A sensor in the match ball catches the moment of the kick. The alert hits the referee's earpiece in real time. Then a human still decides whether it actually changed the play. That is trustworthy AI in one frame. A scoped task. A threshold you can measure. A named person who owns the final call. Most of what gets pitched to you as AI has none of the three.

Source: @AnthropicAI's Managing Director of International, Chris Ciauri, at the Seoul press conference (2026-06-17), via Digital Today: digitaltoday.co.kr/en/view/66935/…

The most capable AI models on earth just spent a week as a bargaining chip. Now the whole industry is refreshing a press conference to find out when they come back. In Seoul, @AnthropicAI's international MD Chris Ciauri said he's "very confident" the models return "in the coming days." Everyone's reading that as: we're back.

@henokcrypto HOPEFUL

FABLE 5 IS COMING BACK THIS WEEKEND ANTHROPIC IS GETTING THE JOB DONE

If you have sat through AI demos and run pilots and still have nothing in production, the problem was never the model. It was that no one owned the thing past the demo. Evolution Plus AI installs a Fractional Chief of AI inside your business. 90 days, two calls a week, systems built and deployed on hardware you own. Your team is trained to run them after handoff. Not a slide deck. Not a roadmap. Something running. Book a call: evolutionplus.ai/contact

@synthwavedd I'm shaking in anticipation! /goals set and ready to launch...

🚨 BREAKING: Anthropic is "confident that in the coming days [Fable 5] will become available again" - Anthropic's International Managing Director we might be back

This functionally levels up /goal and your ability to achieve that goal without AI "filling in the blanks". Who's tested @mattpocockuk /grill-with-docs ?

@petergyang /goal build me a $1M revenue giant, make no mistakes

So I have Codex running on a /goal and it's been working for 2 hours but the problem is it's making alot of wrong assumptions so I have to monitor and steer it constantly. Is this expected? Perhaps I should've had it make a detailed plan first?

A fake Shakira clip went out before the real World Cup opening ceremony and fooled a good part of the internet for an afternoon. The tells were ordinary once someone looked. Dancers floating between frames. Lyrics naming countries not even in the tournament. It was convincing for exactly as long as nobody checked the source. That is the shape of most AI you get shown. Polished surface. No source underneath you can trust. Ask where the number comes from before you believe the picture.

Claude Design now checks its own output against your design system before you ever see it. That is the line worth reading twice! Shipped today: Claude Design pulls your real components from a repo or codebase, syncs both ways with Claude Code, and lets you edit on the canvas. Beta on all paid plans. Everyone will call this design-to-code. The real move is where the brand guardrail now lives. For years you were the last line of defense against off-brand output. You designed, the tool drifted, you caught it in review. Now the system holds the constraint. It builds from your real components and grades itself against your design system first. This scales past design: The teams pulling ahead with AI are not the ones with the cleverest prompts. They are the ones who gave the model a source of truth to check against. A constraint is not a limit on the model. It is what makes the output usable. Design that cannot drift beats design you have to fix.

@claudeai Editing on the canvas will get the attention. The quieter shift: it checks its own output against your design system before you see it. Off-brand stops being your job to catch 🙏

New in Claude Design: it stays on brand with your design system across projects, lets you edit directly on the canvas, syncs with Claude Code, and connects to more of the tools you already use.

@suggestionii This is how we progress, love the vision. Look forward to seeing the progress.

True . Metrics can stay green while an agent does the wrong thing correctly. Our vision is to make those failures visible at scale. When you're managing fleets of agents across wallets, payments, APIs, and services, you need more than success/failure metrics you need context, traceability, and operational visibility. The goal is to make agent behavior easier to understand, audit, and intervene on before small mistakes become expensive ones.

>Production is becoming autonomous as AI agents write code, review it, generate tests, open PRs, provision infrastructure, deploy, and remediate issues. >Traditional monitoring fails for agentic systems due to the semantic gap between intent and behavior. >Execution traces, tool call histories, and reasoning-aware observability are now foundational for debugging, accountability, and security. >Infrastructure like Stripe is building products for the agentic era where software agents participate directly in deployments and commerce. >New observability extending to autonomous decisions and operational memory is required, with Wardy building open tools on top of existing stacks. @wardy_ai definitely keeping an Eye. 👁️

@mlcarldev Keen to see the continued progress here. Losts of great things happening with easy access to the most powerful models (given Fable's unknown return). Followed, notifications on. Keep us posted 🫡

@evolutionplusai I didn't have brand names yet, and I don't know why Claude Code chose Codex. That, of course, will change.

I gave two AI coding agents the same complex build. Different models, different harnesses. 15 hours later, both still working autonomously. Claude 4.8 in CLaude Code Ultracode vs GLM 5.2 in Droid /missions mode. Same mission, same repo, same 25K-char spec. Two different model architectures solving the same engineering problem in parallel. Watching where they diverge is the interesting part. They are building a platform that generates differentiated, professional written output through a multi-stage LLM pipeline… synthesizing from complex intelligence inputs and contextual preparation to produce calibrated document variants across multiple product modes. This is not a CRUD app or a chatbot wrapper. It’s a multi-stage document synthesis engine. Pipeline architecture. The engine runs eight discrete stages. Each stage is a separate LLM operation with its own model assignment and reasoning-mode control. The thinking mode (deep chain of thought vs. fast generation) is toggled per stage via configuration... reasoning on for the stages that need it, off for speed-critical stages. A GroundingStrategy interface means the verification and grounding logic is swappable per use case. Different product modes reuse the same pipeline engine by changing strategy configuration, not by rewriting code. The architecture is designed so the engine produces different categories of written output... long form reference documents, structured items, modular content blocks... from the same core by reconfiguration. Checkpoint and resume. Generation jobs are long running. The pipeline checkpoints state so a failed or interrupted stage doesn’t burn hours of prior work. Resume from the last good checkpoint. Async job processing. A queue backed worker architecture decouples heavy generation work from the request layer. Workers pull jobs, execute pipeline stages, and heartbeat their status. The same worker code runs locally as a process and in production as a managed container service. What makes this hard for an agent. The agent has to internalize a 25,000-character PRD plus architecture and verification docs, decompose the build into ordered milestones, scaffold the entire infrastructure (auth, database, storage, queue, payments), wire eight LLM stages with correct model and thinking mode configs, implement the queue worker heartbeat loop, and make the whole thing run locally against real services... not mocks. Architecture and stack Full local first stack via Docker Compose. Every cloud dependency has a local equivalent that speaks the same protocol, so the application is fully functional during development with zero cloud accounts: Database + Auth + Storage Supabase self-hosted (real Postgres, GoTrue authentication, Row Level Security, auto generated REST API, file storage). Same as Supabase cloud, running in a container. Object storage MinIO (S3 compatible API). Swap the endpoint URL and the same code talks to S3 or R2 in production. Job queue — LocalStack (SQS compatible API). Same code, different endpoint. Payments — Stripe CLI in test mode with webhook forwarding. Frontend — Vite dev server. The code is identical for local and production. Only connection strings change... environment variables. Deploy means swapping localhost URLs for cloud endpoints. No code forks, no feature flags, no parallel branches. Three process model. Frontend + API + async worker, all containerized, all healthchecked. Services run on non-default ports with namespaced Docker projects so multiple stacks coexist on the same machine without port or project name collisions. Mission mode autonomous execution. The repository is deliberately naked... just AGENTS.md (behavioral guardrails and repo hazards) and docs/ (the full specification). No workflow framework, no step by step instructions. The agent reads everything, decomposes the build into milestones, and executes. Fire and forget: start the mission, come back hours later to a working application. The agent never blocks mid build to ask the owner for a Supabase URL, AWS credentials, or an S3 bucket... because it doesn’t need them. Row Level Security. Multi tenant isolation is enforced at the database layer, not the application layer. One database, strict tenant boundaries, no cross contamination possible even if the application has a bug. Cross model adversarial validation. The Droid harness supports bring your own key... any model. The build agent (GLM 5.2) and the validation agent (a different model) have fundamentally different architectures, so they don’t share blind spots. One builds, the other scrutinizes. Claude Code can only do Claude reviewing Claude. This is structurally stronger validation. Git native. Every change the agent makes is version controlled. Auditable, reversible, diffable. You can reconstruct exactly what the agent did at any point. Endurance as a feature. If I see how many of the milestones have been implemented now after 15 hours, I think the whole project might run for 25-30 hours, non-stop. In Claude Code, it already had me ask a few things a few times, but it is still quite autonomous in the Ultra Code mode. Droid definitely is more autonomous if you send it into a mission and provide it with everything that it needs. In this case, you also have to think ahead and prepare (for example, an .env file with API keys if you wanted to do real-life tests). Essentially, anything that the agent could need should be provided. Then, you can have it run for two or three days and create a professional, full-stack application. Alternatively, you can sit at your computer and observe it. When you are not as well prepared, just give it what it needs in case it needs something. We are really at the point now where an excellent harness like Droid, paired with a very capable model like GLM 5.2, can work for days and create whatever you want, as long as you describe it well enough. Essentially, fully autonomously. That's pretty crazy, to be honest.And it's accessible to anyone, and it doesn't even cost much. I am not a developer. I learned what I learned just by being one of these idiots who actually read every output that the models provide during coding. I started as a spontaneous vibecoder a while ago, things got more and more serious, and that is where I am today. Models like Fable or the next two or three versions of GLM will make less and less knowledge necessary. However, it will still take a while until even the best model will be able to design on its own the features that a product like the one I'm building right now needs. I think we are still far away from that.

@heyrimsha Crawl4AI is great until you hit scale and anti-bot, then the $333 is mostly paying someone to fight Cloudflare for you. Fine trade for some, not all. Unless I can be proven wrong. Might need to dig further into it.

Firecrawl charges $333/month to scrape websites at scale. I found one github repo that do the same thing for free. It's called Crawl4AI. You need to drop in a URL and get back clean, structured data your LLM can actually read. No account. No API key. No credit system nickel and diming you per page. Here's what it does: → Scrapes any website into clean markdown or structured JSON → Handles JavaScript-rendered pages, dynamic content, SPAs → Extracts specific fields using CSS, XPath, or plain English instructions → Runs async -- crawl hundreds of pages in parallel → Works via Python, REST API, or Docker → Built-in support for AI agents, RAG pipelines, and MCP One command to install: pip install crawl4ai && crawl4ai-setup The developer built it after finding a tool that called itself open source, asked for an account, charged $16, and still underdelivered. He went into what he called "turbo anger mode" and shipped Crawl4AI in days. It went viral immediately. 67.8K stars on GitHub. 9.7M total PyPI downloads. The most-starred web crawler on GitHub right now. Firecrawl starts at $83/month for standard use and $333/month for any real scale. Crawl4AI: $0. 100% open source. github.com/unclecode/craw…

@Asteri_eth A laptop was never the right home for something that should run while you sleep.

Mac Mini + iPad + Claude Code the most underrated trio of 2026 Your AI stops working when you close your laptop not so with these The Mac Mini sits in the cupboard, without a monitor or keyboard, whilst Claude Code runs 24/7 Agents check the code, manage files and drive the workflow whilst you’re off doing something else You’re sitting in a cafe, open your iPad, connect to your full desktop, see what the agents are up to, give one a nudge, close the lid and order another coffee A $600 box, a Claude subscription, and the iPad you already own Demo below 👇

@RykerStone_ Is the graph staying fresh as the code changes, or is it a snapshot?

I just full-indexed the Linux kernel — 28 million lines of code, 75,000 files — into a queryable knowledge graph in 3 minutes. Then I asked it "what calls this function" and got an answer in under 1ms. This is what AI coding agents should have been doing all along 🧵

@HermesAgentTips Thanks for the reply. I'll take a look at Noshy!

@evolutionplusai decay + ttl + feedback scores fading old/unused memories automatically plus manual purge/delete when you want it gone outright..

I built Noshy, an open source memory layer for AI agents and v0.2 just shipped The idea is simple.. every agent conversation generates facts, decisions, and preferences. Noshy extracts them automatically, stores them in SQLite, and injects them back at the start of your next session.. no more explaining your stack from scratch every time you open a terminal what I shipped on v0.2.0 - a python decorator, import @ noshy.remember and every function call with its arguments and return value is stored automatically, no setup, no config - a web dashboard, point your browser at the same port the server runs on and see what your agent remembers, search across sessions, check stats - PyPI support, pip install noshy on any platform with Python 3.10 or higher - semantic memoir search for permanent knowledge, vector embeddings work out of the box with openai or fastembed, no API key required for the local option - auto decay and dedup, old memories fade, duplicates merge, the store stays compact without manual maintenance what do you use for cross session agents memory?

@lumpenspace A fresh branch for a one-line CSS fix is the most junior-dev habit it could have inherited. But love is love.

oh to be loved by someone the way claude code loves opening branches for stylesheet changes

@richiemcilroy They want goals to be a north star, not a spec dump. The cap is doing you a favor.

hmm, /goals are limited to 4000 characters in both Claude Code, and Codex interesting

@ignat_en Format was never the hard part. Keeping the context true after the third person edits it is.

Google just shipped the Open Knowledge Format. It's good, but it skips the hard part. Markdown plus a little YAML frontmatter, shippable as a tarball, readable in any editor, indexable by any tool. If your AI context is trapped in scattered wikis and code comments, OKF gives it a clean, portable shape. I agree with the diagnosis. It's the problem I've been working on for the last few months. Making knowledge portable is an important step forward. But here's what the announcement leaves out. The format is the easy 80%, and Google just gave it a common language. The hard 20% is everything a static file can't represent: 1) Who's allowed to see which fact. A markdown file in a tarball doesn't know the comp doc is off-limits to the intern. A company brain has to enforce that inside the query itself, or the AI will happily quote a source the asker was never allowed to open. 2) When a fact stopped being true. OKF has a timestamp. A real decision has a lifecycle: it took effect in January, got superseded in March, and the thing that replaced it points back. Ask about a year-old decision and you should learn what changed, not get a stale file with a confident date on it. 3) Whether the answer is proven or guessed. A wiki hands an LLM context and hopes. Grounding means every claim is pinned to the exact sentence it came from, with a page and a source you can open. Readable-by-an-LLM is not the same as verifiable. The format makes knowledge portable. That's a really important step forward. But it doesn't make it permissioned, dated, or provable. That's the actual company brain, and that's where the real work is. We're building it at Combra. If this is the problem you're living with, the waitlist is open.