AI May Soon Help You Understand What Your Pet Is Trying to Say
Chinese tech powerhouse Baidu has filed a patent for a system that could use AI to decode animal sounds and behaviour then translate those signals into human language. For the millions of pet owners wondering what their animals are thinking, this could be the first real step toward bridging the communication gap between humans and animals. The tech Baidu’s system would collect animal vocalizations, body movements, and biological signals. It would merge that data and feed it into an AI model trained to identify emotional states. These emotional states could then be rendered in human language to boost “cross-species communication”. The post AI May Soon Help You Understand What Your Pet Is Trying to Say appeared first on DailyAI.
How an astrophysicist uses Codex to help simulate black holes
Discover how astrophysicist Chi-kwan Chan uses Codex to build black hole simulations, helping scientists study extreme physics and test Einstein’s theory of general relativity.
OpenAI to acquire Ona
OpenAI plans to acquire Ona to expand Codex with secure, persistent cloud environments, enabling long-running AI agents across enterprise workflows.
Save time and grow your business with new Gemini tools
An overview of new features in the Gemini app designed specifically to support businesses and entrepreneurs.
Nous Research's NousCoder-14B is an open-source coding model landing right in the Claude Code moment
Nous Research, the open-source artificial intelligence startup backed by crypto venture firm Paradigm, released a new competitive programming model on Monday that it says matches or exceeds several larger proprietary systems — trained in just four days using 48 of Nvidia's latest B200 graphics processors. The model, called NousCoder-14B, is another entry in a crowded field of AI coding assistants, but arrives at a particularly charged moment: Claude Code, the agentic programming tool from rival Anthropic, has dominated social media discussion since New Year's Day, with developers posting breathless testimonials about its capabilities. The simultaneous developments underscore how quickly AI-assisted software development is evolving — and how fiercely companies large and small are competing to capture what many believe will become a foundational technology for how software gets written. type: embedded-entry-inline id: 74cSyrq6OUrp9SEQ5zOUSl NousCoder-14B achieves a 67.87 percent accuracy rate on LiveCodeBench v6, a standardized evaluation that tests models on competitive programming problems published between August 2024 and May 2025. That figure represents a 7.08 percentage point improvement over the base model it was trained from, Alibaba's Qwen3-14B, according to Nous Research's technical report published alongside the release. "I gave Claude Code a description of the problem, it generated what we built last year in an hour," wrote Jaana Dogan, a principal engineer at Google responsible for the Gemini API, in a viral post on X last week that captured the prevailing mood around AI coding tools. Dogan was describing a distributed agent orchestration system her team had spent a year developing — a system Claude Code approximated from a three-paragraph prompt. The juxtaposition is instructive: while Anthropic's Claude Code has captured imaginations with demonstrations of end-to-end software development, Nous Research is betting that open-source alternatives trained on verifiable problems can close the gap — and that transparency in how these models are built matters as much as raw capability. How Nous Research built an AI coding model that anyone can replicate What distinguishes the NousCoder-14B release from many competitor announcements is its radical openness. Nous Research published not just the model weights but the complete reinforcement learning environment, benchmark suite, and training harness — built on the company's Atropos framework — enabling any researcher with sufficient compute to reproduce or extend the work. "Open-sourcing the Atropos stack provides the necessary infrastructure for reproducible olympiad-level reasoning research," noted one observer on X, summarizing the significance for the academic and open-source communities. The model was trained by Joe Li, a researcher in residence at Nous Research and a former competitive programmer himself. Li's technical report reveals an unexpectedly personal dimension: he compared the model's improvement trajectory to his own journey on Codeforces, the competitive programming platform where participants earn ratings based on contest performance. Based on rough estimates mapping LiveCodeBench scores to Codeforces ratings, Li calculated that NousCoder-14B's improvemen t— from approximately the 1600-1750 rating range to 2100-2200 — mirrors a leap that took him nearly two years of sustained practice between ages 14 and 16. The model accomplished the equivalent in four days. "Watching that final training run unfold was quite a surreal experience," Li wrote in the technical report. But Li was quick to note an important caveat that speaks to broader questions about AI efficiency: he solved roughly 1,000 problems during those two years, while the model required 24,000. Humans, at least for now, remain dramatically more sample-efficient learners. Inside the reinforcement learning system that trains on 24,000 competitive programming problems NousCoder-14B's training process offers a window into the increasingly sophisticated techniques researchers use to improve AI reasoning capabilities through reinforcement learning. The approach relies on what researchers call "verifiable rewards" — a system where the model generates code solutions, those solutions are executed against test cases, and the model receives a simple binary signal: correct or incorrect. This feedback loop, while conceptually straightforward, requires significant infrastructure to execute at scale. Nous Research used Modal, a cloud computing platform, to run sandboxed code execution in parallel. Each of the 24,000 training problems contains hundreds of test cases on average, and the system must verify that generated code produces correct outputs within time and memory constraints — 15 seconds and 4 gigabytes, respectively. The training employed a technique called DAPO (Dynamic Sampling Policy Optimization), which the researchers found performed slightly better than alternatives in their experiments. A key innovation involves "dynamic sampling" — discarding training examples where the model either solves all attempts or fails all attempts, since these provide no useful gradient signal for learning. The researchers also adopted "iterative context extension," first training the model with a 32,000-token context window before expanding to 40,000 tokens. During evaluation, extending the context further to approximately 80,000 tokens produced the best results, with accuracy reaching 67.87 percent. Perhaps most significantly, the training pipeline overlaps inference and verification — as soon as the model generates a solution, it begins work on the next problem while the previous solution is being checked. This pipelining, combined with asynchronous training where multiple model instances work in parallel, maximizes hardware utilization on expensive GPU clusters. The looming data shortage that could slow AI coding model progress Buried in Li's technical report is a finding with significant implications for the future of AI development: the training dataset for NousCoder-14B encompasses "a significant portion of all readily available, verifiable competitive programming problems in a standardized dataset format." In other words, for this particular domain, the researchers are approaching the limits of high-quality training data. "The total number of competitive programming problems on the Internet is roughly the same order of magnitude," Li wrote, referring to the 24,000 problems used for training. "This suggests that within the competitive programming domain, we have approached the limits of high-quality data." This observation echoes growing concern across the AI industry about data constraints. While compute continues to scale according to well-understood economic and engineering principles, training data is "increasingly finite," as Li put it. "It appears that some of the most important research that needs to be done in the future will be in the areas of synthetic data generation and data efficient algorithms and architectures," he concluded. The challenge is particularly acute for competitive programming because the domain requires problems with known correct solutions that can be verified automatically. Unlike natural language tasks where human evaluation or proxy metrics suffice, code either works or it doesn't — making synthetic data generation considerably more difficult. Li identified one potential avenue: training models not just to solve problems but to generate solvable problems, enabling a form of self-play similar to techniques that proved successful in game-playing AI systems. "Once synthetic problem generation is solved, self-play becomes a very interesting direction," he wrote. A $65 million bet that open-source AI can compete with Big Tech Nous Research has carved out a distinctive position in the AI landscape: a company committed to open-source releases that compete with — and sometimes exceed — proprietary alternatives. The company raised $50 million in April 2025 in a round led by Paradigm, the cryptocurrency-focused venture firm founded by Coinbase co-founder Fred Ehrsam. Total funding reached $65 million, according to some reports. The investment reflected growing interest in decentralized approaches to AI training, an area where Nous Research has developed its Psyche platform. Previous releases include Hermes 4, a family of models that we reported "outperform ChatGPT without content restrictions," and DeepHermes-3, which the company described as the first "toggle-on reasoning model" — allowing users to activate extended thinking capabilities on demand. The company has cultivated a distinctive aesthetic and community, prompting some skepticism about whether style might overshadow substance. "Ofc i'm gonna believe an anime pfp company. stop benchmarkmaxxing ffs," wrote one critic on X, referring to Nous Research's anime-style branding and the industry practice of optimizing for benchmark performance. Others raised technical questions. "Based on the benchmark, Nemotron is better," noted one commenter, referring to Nvidia's family of language models. Another asked whether NousCoder-14B is "agentic focused or just 'one shot' coding" — a distinction that matters for practical software development, where iterating on feedback typically produces better results than single attempts. What researchers say must happen next for AI coding tools to keep improving The release includes several directions for future work that hint at where AI coding research may be heading. Multi-turn reinforcement learning tops the list. Currently, the model receives only a final binary reward — pass or fail — after generating a solution. But competitive programming problems typically include public test cases that provide intermediate feedback: compilation errors, incorrect outputs, time limit violations. Training models to incorporate this feedback across multiple attempts could significantly improve performance. Controlling response length also remains a challenge. The researchers found that incorrect solutions tended to be longer than correct ones, and response lengths quickly saturated available context windows during training — a pattern that various algorithmic modifications failed to resolve. Perhaps most ambitiously, Li proposed "problem generation and self-play" — training models to both solve and create programming problems. This would address the data scarcity problem directly by enabling models to generate their own training curricula. "Humans are great at generating interesting and useful problems for other competitive programmers, but it appears that there still exists a significant gap in LLM capabilities in creative problem generation," Li wrote. The model is available now on Hugging Face under an Apache 2.0 license. For researchers and developers who want to build on the work, Nous Research has published the complete Atropos training stack alongside it. What took Li two years of adolescent dedication to achieve—climbing from a 1600-level novice to a 2100-rated competitor on Codeforces—an AI replicated in 96 hours. He needed 1,000 problems. The model needed 24,000. But soon enough, these systems may learn to write their own problems, teach themselves, and leave human benchmarks behind entirely. The question is no longer whether machines can learn to code. It's whether they'll soon be better teachers than we ever were.
I/O 2026: Welcome to the agentic Gemini era
The latest from Google I/O: See how we’re helping you get more done with Gemini.
Netflix Adds ChatGPT-Powered AI to Stop You From Scrolling Forever
In a bold move to tackle one of streaming’s biggest frustrations, endless scrolling, Netflix just unveiled a major redesign of its TV and mobile apps featuring a ChatGPT-powered AI chatbot and TikTok-style video reels. You’ll soon be able to ask Netflix in plain language what you’re in the mood for “funny and fast-paced” or “dark thrillers with strong female leads” and get instant, tailored recommendations. Netflix is partnering with OpenAI to power this feature, part of a broader overhaul aimed at making content discovery faster, more intuitive, and (finally) less painful. What’s changing Conversational AI Search: Powered by OpenAI, this The post Netflix Adds ChatGPT-Powered AI to Stop You From Scrolling Forever appeared first on DailyAI.
Connect BrightHire to the rest of your hiring workflow
An interview isn't one task. Now that BrightHire connects with Zapier, teams can automate more of the work around it. Before an interview starts, the team needs the right candidate, position, and schedule records in place. After it ends, the team needs the notes, transcript, summary, tasks, and updates to reach the tools where decisions happen. BrightHire captures the interview intelligence: recordings, transcripts, notes, questions, and conversation analytics. With the new BrightHire integratio
How Preply combines AI and human tutors to personalize learning
Preply uses OpenAI to launch AI-generated lesson summaries, providing personalised feedback and language learning exercises.
Zapier pricing: Why Zapier is a better value than Make, n8n, and other automation platforms
When evaluating software, pricing is about more than the dollar amount: it's about the return on your investment. One business might fixate on price-per-task, while another might care more about speed to market, reliability, or the ability to scale without hiring. Neither is wrong. But the tools that deliver real business value—consistently, predictably, and at scale—tend to pay for themselves quickly. Zapier is one of those tools. With transparent pricing, powerful built-in features, and the ab
The 9 best fitness apps in 2026
If you're overwhelmed by the number of fitness apps on the market, you're not alone. There are seemingly a bajillion fitness apps available, and from logging your personal bests to tracking your pickleball wins, each has its own niche. That's great in terms of giving users variety—but when you're scoping out a new app, it can often feel like you're comparing apples to oranges. And staying fit is hard enough; your fitness app should make it easier, not more complicated. As someone who's tried a
Take our I/O 2026 quiz, vibe coded in Google AI Studio.
We used Google AI Studio to vibe code a quiz about our top I/O 2026 announcements.
Amazon hopes to challenge Nvidia more directly by selling its AI chips
AWS is in talks to sell its chips to other data centers. CEO Andy Jassy has said this represents a $50 billion opportunity for the company.
Employee onboarding automation: A complete guide
Too busy onboarding and offboarding employees to focus on other business-critical processes? Whether you're in HR or IT, it's your job to make sure new employees have the tools they need to kickstart their careers—and to wrap up when they leave. But doing that (on top of your other priority work) can quickly become overwhelming if you're handling these processes manually. With just a few Zap workflows—what we call automations—you can send team notifications about new employees, assign onboardi
Yes, I enjoyed LA's new AI Museum. Here's why I still didn't like it - LAist
Yes, I enjoyed LA's new AI Museum. Here's why I still didn't like it LAist
Listen Labs raises $69M after viral billboard hiring stunt to scale AI customer interviews
Alfred Wahlforss was running out of options. His startup, Listen Labs, needed to hire over 100 engineers, but competing against Mark Zuckerberg's $100 million offers seemed impossible. So he spent $5,000 — a fifth of his marketing budget — on a billboard in San Francisco displaying what looked like gibberish: five strings of random numbers. The numbers were actually AI tokens. Decoded, they led to a coding challenge: build an algorithm to act as a digital bouncer at Berghain, the Berlin nightclub famous for rejecting nearly everyone at the door. Within days, thousands attempted the puzzle. 430 cracked it. Some got hired. The winner flew to Berlin, all expenses paid. That unconventional approach has now attracted $69 million in Series B funding, led by Ribbit Capital with participation from Evantic and existing investors Sequoia Capital, Conviction, and Pear VC. The round values Listen Labs at $500 million and brings its total capital to $100 million. In nine months since launch, the company has grown annualized revenue by 15x to eight figures and conducted over one million AI-powered interviews. "When you obsess over customers, everything else follows," Wahlforss said in an interview with VentureBeat. "Teams that use Listen bring the customer into every decision, from marketing to product, and when the customer is delighted, everyone is." Why traditional market research is broken, and what Listen Labs is building to fix it Listen's AI researcher finds participants, conducts in-depth interviews, and delivers actionable insights in hours, not weeks. The platform replaces the traditional choice between quantitative surveys — which provide statistical precision but miss nuance—and qualitative interviews, which deliver depth but cannot scale. Wahlforss explained the limitation of existing approaches: "Essentially surveys give you false precision because people end up answering the same question... You can't get the outliers. People are actually not honest on surveys." The alternative, one-on-one human interviews, "gives you a lot of depth. You can ask follow up questions. You can kind of double check if they actually know what they're talking about. And the problem is you can't scale that." The platform works in four steps: users create a study with AI assistance, Listen recruits participants from its global network of 30 million people, an AI moderator conducts in-depth interviews with follow-up questions, and results are packaged into executive-ready reports including key themes, highlight reels, and slide decks. What distinguishes Listen's approach is its use of open-ended video conversations rather than multiple-choice forms. "In a survey, you can kind of guess what you should answer, and you have four options," Wahlforss said. "Oh, they probably want me to buy high income. Let me click on that button versus an open ended response. It just generates much more honesty." The dirty secret of the $140 billion market research industry: rampant fraud Listen finds and qualifies the right participants in its global network of 30 million people. But building that panel required confronting what Wahlforss called "one of the most shocking things that we've learned when we entered this industry"—rampant fraud. "Essentially, there's a financial transaction involved, which means there will be bad players," he explained. "We actually had some of the largest companies, some of them have billions in revenue, send us people who claim to be kind of enterprise buyers to our platform and our system immediately detected, like, fraud, fraud, fraud, fraud, fraud." The company built what it calls a "quality guard" that cross-references LinkedIn profiles with video responses to verify identity, checks consistency across how participants answer questions, and flags suspicious patterns. The result, according to Wahlforss: "People talk three times more. They're much more honest when they talk about sensitive topics like politics and mental health." Emeritus, an online education company that uses Listen, reported that approximately 20% of survey responses previously fell into the fraudulent or low-quality category. With Listen, they reduced this to almost zero. "We did not have to replace any responses because of fraud or gibberish information," said Gabrielli Tiburi, Assistant Manager of Customer Insights at Emeritus. How Microsoft, Sweetgreen, and Chubbies are using AI interviews to build better products The speed advantage has proven central to Listen's pitch. Traditional customer research at Microsoft could take four to six weeks to generate insights. "By the time we get to them, either the decision has been made or we lose out on the opportunity to actually influence it," said Romani Patel, Senior Research Manager at Microsoft. With Listen, Microsoft can now get insights in days, and in many cases, within hours. The platform has already powered several high-profile initiatives. Microsoft used Listen Labs to collect global customer stories for its 50th anniversary celebration. "We wanted users to share how Copilot is empowering them to bring their best self forward," Patel said, "and we were able to collect those user video stories within a day." Traditionally, that kind of work would have taken six to eight weeks. Simple Modern, an Oklahoma-based drinkware company, used Listen to test a new product concept. The process took about an hour to write questions, an hour to launch the study, and 2.5 hours to receive feedback from 120 people across the country. "We went from 'Should we even have this product?' to 'How should we launch it?'" said Chris Hoyle, the company's Chief Marketing Officer. Chubbies, the shorts brand, achieved a 24x increase in youth research participation—growing from 5 to 120 participants — by using Listen to overcome the scheduling challenges of traditional focus groups with children. "There's school, sports, dinner, and homework," explained Lauren Neville, Director of Insights and Innovation. "I had to find a way to hear from them that fit into their schedules." The company also discovered product issues through AI interviews that might have gone undetected otherwise. Wahlforss described how the AI "through conversations, realized there were like issues with the the kids short line, and decided to, like, interview hundreds of kids. And I understand that there were issues in the liner of the shorts and that they were, like, scratchy, quote, unquote, according to the people interviewed." The redesigned product became "a blockbuster hit." The Jevons paradox explains why cheaper research creates more demand, not less Listen Labs is entering a massive but fragmented market. Wahlforss cited research from Andreessen Horowitz estimating the market research industry at roughly $140 billion annually, populated by legacy players — some with more than a billion dollars in revenue — that he believes are vulnerable to disruption. "There are very much existing budget lines that we are replacing," Wahlforss said. "Why we're replacing them is that one, they're super costly. Two, they're kind of stuck in this old paradigm of choosing between a survey or interview, and they also take months to work with." But the more intriguing dynamic may be that AI-powered research doesn't just replace existing spending — it creates new demand. Wahlforss invoked the Jevons paradox, an economic principle that occurs when technological advancements make a resource more efficient to use, but increased efficiency leads to increased overall consumption rather than decreased consumption. "What I've noticed is that as something gets cheaper, you don't need less of it. You want more of it," Wahlforss explained. "There's infinite demand for customer understanding. So the researchers on the team can do an order of magnitude more research, and also other people who weren't researchers before can now do that as part of their job." Inside the elite engineering team that built Listen Labs before they had a working toilet Listen Labs traces its origins to a consumer app that Wahlforss and his co-founder built after meeting at Harvard. "We built this consumer app that got 20,000 downloads in one day," Wahlforss recalled. "We had all these users, and we were thinking like, okay, what can we do to get to know them better? And we built this prototype of what Listen is today." The founding team brings an unusual pedigree. Wahlforss's co-founder "was the national champion in competitive programming in Germany, and he worked at Tesla Autopilot." The company claims that 30% of its engineering team are medalists from the International Olympiad in Informatics — the same competition that produced the founders of Cognition, the AI coding startup. The Berghain billboard stunt generated approximately 5 million views across social media, according to Wahlforss. It reflected the intensity of the talent war in the Bay Area. "We had to do these things because some of our, like early employees, joined the company before we had a working toilet," he said. "But now we fixed that situation." The company grew from 5 to 40 employees in 2024 and plans to reach 150 this year. It hires engineers for non-engineering roles across marketing, growth, and operations — a bet that in the AI era, technical fluency matters everywhere. Synthetic customers and automated decisions: what Listen Labs is building next Wahlforss outlined an ambitious product roadmap that pushes into more speculative territory. The company is building "the ability to simulate your customers, so you can take all of those interviews we've done, and then extrapolate based on that and create synthetic users or simulated user voices." Beyond simulation, Listen aims to enable automated action based on research findings. "Can you not just make recommendations, but also create spawn agents to either change things in code or some customer churns? Can you give them a discount and try to bring them back?" Wahlforss acknowledged the ethical implications. "Obviously, as you said, there's kind of ethical concerns there. Of like, automated decision making overall can be bad, but we will have considerable guardrails to make sure that the companies are always in the loop." The company already handles sensitive data with care. "We don't train on any of the data," Wahlforss said. "We will also scrub any sensitive PII automatically so the model can detect that. And there are times when, for example, you work with investors, where if you accidentally mention something that could be material, non public information, the AI can actually detect that and remove any information like that." How AI could reshape the future of product development Perhaps the most provocative implication of Listen's model is how it could reshape product development itself. Wahlforss described a customer — an Australian startup — that has adopted what amounts to a continuous feedback loop. "They're based in Australia, so they're coding during the day, and then in their night, they're releasing a Listen study with an American audience. Listen validates whatever they built during the day, and they get feedback on that. They can then plug that feedback directly into coding tools like Claude Code and iterate." The vision extends Y Combinator's famous dictum — "write code, talk to users" — into an automated cycle. "Write code is now getting automated. And I think like talk to users will be as well, and you'll have this kind of infinite loop where you can start to ship this truly amazing product, almost kind of autonomously." Whether that vision materializes depends on factors beyond Listen's control — the continued improvement of AI models, enterprise willingness to trust automated research, and whether speed truly correlates with better products. A 2024 MIT study found that 95% of AI pilots fail to move into production, a statistic Wahlforss cited as the reason he emphasizes quality over demos. "I'm constantly have to emphasize like, let's make sure the quality is there and the details are right," he said. But the company's growth suggests appetite for the experiment. Microsoft's Patel said Listen has "removed the drudgery of research and brought the fun and joy back into my work." Chubbies is now pushing its founder to give everyone in the company a login. Sling Money, a stablecoin payments startup, can create a survey in ten minutes and receive results the same day. "It's a total game changer," said Ali Romero, Sling Money's marketing manager. Wahlforss has a different phrase for what he's building. When asked about the tension between speed and rigor — the long-held belief that moving fast means cutting corners — he cited Nat Friedman, the former GitHub CEO and Listen investor, who keeps a list of one-liners on his website. One of them: "Slow is fake." It's an aggressive claim for an industry built on methodological caution. But Listen Labs is betting that in the AI era, the companies that listen fastest will be the ones that win. The only question is whether customers will talk back.
Powering the world’s first AI arts museum
Refik Anadol Studio opens Dataland, the first museum of AI arts, powered by Google Cloud and supported by Google Arts & Culture.
Artificial intelligence raises profound moral questions — for all of humanity to answer - The Conversation
Artificial intelligence raises profound moral questions — for all of humanity to answer The Conversation
Introducing the OpenAI Partner Network
OpenAI launches the Partner Network, investing $150M to help global partners accelerate enterprise AI adoption, deployment, and transformation.
Almost half of US singles feel negatively about AI in dating, Match says
About 47% of singles look negatively at the use of AI in dating -- but many dating app users are open to AI helping with profile punch-ups and conversation starters.
Pope Leo XIV Declares AI a Threat to Human Dignity and Workers’ Rights
Pope Leo XIV is taking a bold stance on artificial intelligence, calling it “a challenge to human dignity, justice and labour” in his first major address since being elected leader of the Catholic Church. The new pontiff is placing AI at the center of the Church’s moral agenda, warning that we’re entering a new industrial revolution with the same threats to workers and human rights seen over a century ago. “In our own day… developments in the field of artificial intelligence pose new challenges,” Leo said, addressing the College of Cardinals on Saturday in the New Synod Hall. He echoed The post Pope Leo XIV Declares AI a Threat to Human Dignity and Workers’ Rights appeared first on DailyAI.
A near-autonomous AI chemist improves a challenging reaction in medicinal chemistry
OpenAI and Molecule.one show how a near-autonomous AI chemist using GPT-5.4 improved a key drug-making reaction, advancing medicinal chemistry research.
June Pixel Drop: New features for creators, Gemini upgrades and more
Get new screen recording feature, text-to-video tools with Gemini Omni, and better multitasking on your Pixel devices.
What is Claude Mythos? And what happened to Claude Fable 5?
On April 7, 2026, Claude Mythos Preview was officially announced, but it was apparently too dangerous to release. According to Anthropic, Claude Mythos represented a unique cybersecurity threat (they claimed that "the fallout—for economies, public safety, and national security—could be severe.") Instead of releasing Mythos to the general public, they spun up Project Glasswing, a cybersecurity initiative that also involved some big-name companies. The idea was that they'd be able to deploy Mythos
Katy Perry Didn’t Attend the Met Gala, But AI Made Her the Star of the Night
Another year, another viral deepfake of Katy Perry at the Met Gala and once again, she wasn’t even there. Photos showing the pop star in a sleek black designer gown circulated widely on social media during Monday night’s event, matching the “Superfine: Tailoring Black Style” theme. But the images were AI-generated. Perry quickly clarified she was not at the Met; she was on tour. Perry’s reaction “Couldn’t make it to the MET, I’m on The Lifetimes Tour (see you in Houston tomorrow IRL),” she posted to Instagram alongside the fake images. She added a jab at AI confusion: “P.s. this The post Katy Perry Didn’t Attend the Met Gala, But AI Made Her the Star of the Night appeared first on DailyAI.
New usage analytics and updated spend controls for enterprises
OpenAI introduces new spend controls and usage analytics for ChatGPT Enterprise, helping organizations manage costs and scale AI with confidence.
New research shows how AMIE, our medical AI, could help manage health conditions.
Research in “Nature” shows our conversational AI system matches primary care physicians in complex disease management.
AI in the workplace: What it looks like now and where we're headed
I'm not ruling out a future where the Terminator walks through the office doors and asks where he can find me. But until then, AI in the workplace doesn't have to be scary. In reality, it falls more on the spectrum from helpful to overhyped—and the trick is to calibrate accordingly. There are a lot of ways to use AI at work. Maybe Granola writes your meeting recaps, or you embed a chatbot into your website to answer customer questions. Or maybe you use MCP to have ChatGPT or Cursor take actions
3 Top Artificial Intelligence (AI) Stocks to Buy With $1,000 Right Now - The Motley Fool
3 Top Artificial Intelligence (AI) Stocks to Buy With $1,000 Right Now The Motley Fool
Supporting Europe’s work in ensuring a trustworthy AI ecosystem
OpenAI supports the EU Code of Practice on AI content transparency, advancing provenance standards and tools to help people understand AI-generated content.
BBVA puts AI at the core of banking with OpenAI
Learn how BBVA scaled ChatGPT Enterprise to 100,000 employees and partnered with OpenAI to accelerate AI-powered banking transformation worldwide.
How AI Mode is changing the way people search in the U.S.
One year after launch, see how AI Mode’s users are shifting from keywords to natural language queries.
How to turn off AI in your Google Docs
Here's what you need to do to get those pesky "write with Gemini" pop-ups to go away.
CEOs of Anthropic and Google DeepMind call for U.S.-led AI coalition in meeting at G7 - CNBC
CEOs of Anthropic and Google DeepMind call for U.S.-led AI coalition in meeting at G7 CNBC
What is artificial intelligence (AI)? - Databricks
What is artificial intelligence (AI)? Databricks
AI cheating crisis may be a gift, education experts say - Times Union
AI cheating crisis may be a gift, education experts say Times Union
Bernie Sanders pitches $1,000 annual payout from public ownership of AI - The Washington Post
Bernie Sanders pitches $1,000 annual payout from public ownership of AI The Washington Post
A tech worker-backed PAC is bringing a $5M knife to Big Tech’s $100M gunfight
Guardrails positions itself as a populist political movement that runs on small donations from people in the trenches of the AI boom.
We’re announcing new community investments in Missouri.
We’re helping build the state’s next-generation workforce and investing in energy programs.
Meet the first 2026 Zappy Award monthly winners: May 2026
We launched the Zappy Awards in May to find the builders quietly redesigning how work gets done at their companies. We're on the hunt for the people who see a problem, pick up Zapier, and do something about it. We've hit 50 submissions. We weren't expecting the bar to be this high this fast. So we've decided to move up our first monthly wins to start right now! These are the first two monthly winners. Rachael Silvano, Community Strategy Lead at Articulate Rachael manages E-Learning Heroes, a co
Claude 5: What you need to know about Anthropic's AI models and chatbot
I've been using Claude long enough to remember when the main selling point was that it was a nicer chatbot to talk to than the alternatives. (That's still true, for what it's worth.) But Claude no longer just talks to you about your work; it also does your work for you. You can give Claude a project, head off to make a coffee, and check in occasionally when questions pop up. For enterprises looking to get real productivity gains from AI, Claude has become the default choice. And Claude is equall
Source: Elastic agrees to buy CRV-backed DeductiveAI for up to $85M
DeductiveAI, a startup that uses AI to catch and resolve bugs in software, was founded just three years ago.
Therapists Too Expensive? Why Thousands of Women Are Spilling Their Deepest Secrets to ChatGPT
More women are turning to ChatGPT for emotional support, using the AI chatbot as a stand-in therapist as mental health systems buckle under pressure. With long wait times and soaring costs, AI is filling a growing gap. Mental health care is harder to access than ever. In the UK, NHS data shows patients are eight times more likely to wait over 18 months for mental health treatment than for physical health. Private therapy isn’t always an option either, with sessions costing £60 or more. In that vacuum, ChatGPT has become a surprising outlet. Real voices, real feelings Charly, 29, from The post Therapists Too Expensive? Why Thousands of Women Are Spilling Their Deepest Secrets to ChatGPT appeared first on DailyAI.
The latest AI news we announced in May 2026
Here are Google’s latest AI updates from May 2026
OpenAI is bringing on some big guns in the lead-up to its IPO
OpenAI is bulking up before its IPO, landing Transformer co-inventor Noam Shazeer from Google DeepMind and former Trump AI policy official Dean Ball in the same week.
‘AI slop’ resolution seeks to reel-in city’s use of artificial intelligence - AJC.com
‘AI slop’ resolution seeks to reel-in city’s use of artificial intelligence AJC.com
Snap spins off AI video team into new company, Dotmo, due to costs
The Snapchat maker is spinning off yet another internal unit. Dotmo will be composed of current Snap staff who are leaving the social media company to focus on AI video development.
The businesses that are doubling down on Seattle - The Seattle Times
The businesses that are doubling down on Seattle The Seattle Times
PRC-linked influence operations are targeting AI debates in the US
A new report from OpenAI details PRC-linked influence operations using AI to target U.S. tech debates, data center narratives, tariffs, and false claims about ChatGPT.
Claude Code costs up to $200 a month. Goose does the same thing for free.
The artificial intelligence coding revolution comes with a catch: it's expensive. Claude Code, Anthropic's terminal-based AI agent that can write, debug, and deploy code autonomously, has captured the imagination of software developers worldwide. But its pricing — ranging from $20 to $200 per month depending on usage — has sparked a growing rebellion among the very programmers it aims to serve. Now, a free alternative is gaining traction. Goose, an open-source AI agent developed by Block (the financial technology company formerly known as Square), offers nearly identical functionality to Claude Code but runs entirely on a user's local machine. No subscription fees. No cloud dependency. No rate limits that reset every five hours. "Your data stays with you, period," said Parth Sareen, a software engineer who demonstrated the tool during a recent livestream. The comment captures the core appeal: Goose gives developers complete control over their AI-powered workflow, including the ability to work offline — even on an airplane. The project has exploded in popularity. Goose now boasts more than 26,100 stars on GitHub, the code-sharing platform, with 362 contributors and 102 releases since its launch. The latest version, 1.20.1, shipped on January 19, 2026, reflecting a development pace that rivals commercial products. For developers frustrated by Claude Code's pricing structure and usage caps, Goose represents something increasingly rare in the AI industry: a genuinely free, no-strings-attached option for serious work. Anthropic's new rate limits spark a developer revolt To understand why Goose matters, you need to understand the Claude Code pricing controversy. Anthropic, the San Francisco artificial intelligence company founded by former OpenAI executives, offers Claude Code as part of its subscription tiers. The free plan provides no access whatsoever. The Pro plan, at $17 per month with annual billing (or $20 monthly), limits users to just 10 to 40 prompts every five hours — a constraint that serious developers exhaust within minutes of intensive work. The Max plans, at $100 and $200 per month, offer more headroom: 50 to 200 prompts and 200 to 800 prompts respectively, plus access to Anthropic's most powerful model, Claude 4.5 Opus. But even these premium tiers come with restrictions that have inflamed the developer community. In late July, Anthropic announced new weekly rate limits. Under the system, Pro users receive 40 to 80 hours of Sonnet 4 usage per week. Max users at the $200 tier get 240 to 480 hours of Sonnet 4, plus 24 to 40 hours of Opus 4. Nearly five months later, the frustration has not subsided. The problem? Those "hours" are not actual hours. They represent token-based limits that vary wildly depending on codebase size, conversation length, and the complexity of the code being processed. Independent analysis suggests the actual per-session limits translate to roughly 44,000 tokens for Pro users and 220,000 tokens for the $200 Max plan. "It's confusing and vague," one developer wrote in a widely shared analysis. "When they say '24-40 hours of Opus 4,' that doesn't really tell you anything useful about what you're actually getting." The backlash on Reddit and developer forums has been fierce. Some users report hitting their daily limits within 30 minutes of intensive coding. Others have canceled their subscriptions entirely, calling the new restrictions "a joke" and "unusable for real work." Anthropic has defended the changes, stating that the limits affect fewer than five percent of users and target people running Claude Code "continuously in the background, 24/7." But the company has not clarified whether that figure refers to five percent of Max subscribers or five percent of all users — a distinction that matters enormously. How Block built a free AI coding agent that works offline Goose takes a radically different approach to the same problem. Built by Block, the payments company led by Jack Dorsey, Goose is what engineers call an "on-machine AI agent." Unlike Claude Code, which sends your queries to Anthropic's servers for processing, Goose can run entirely on your local computer using open-source language models that you download and control yourself. The project's documentation describes it as going "beyond code suggestions" to "install, execute, edit, and test with any LLM." That last phrase — "any LLM" — is the key differentiator. Goose is model-agnostic by design. You can connect Goose to Anthropic's Claude models if you have API access. You can use OpenAI's GPT-5 or Google's Gemini. You can route it through services like Groq or OpenRouter. Or — and this is where things get interesting — you can run it entirely locally using tools like Ollama, which let you download and execute open-source models on your own hardware. The practical implications are significant. With a local setup, there are no subscription fees, no usage caps, no rate limits, and no concerns about your code being sent to external servers. Your conversations with the AI never leave your machine. "I use Ollama all the time on planes — it's a lot of fun!" Sareen noted during a demonstration, highlighting how local models free developers from the constraints of internet connectivity. What Goose can do that traditional code assistants can't Goose operates as a command-line tool or desktop application that can autonomously perform complex development tasks. It can build entire projects from scratch, write and execute code, debug failures, orchestrate workflows across multiple files, and interact with external APIs — all without constant human oversight. The architecture relies on what the AI industry calls "tool calling" or "function calling" — the ability for a language model to request specific actions from external systems. When you ask Goose to create a new file, run a test suite, or check the status of a GitHub pull request, it doesn't just generate text describing what should happen. It actually executes those operations. This capability depends heavily on the underlying language model. Claude 4 models from Anthropic currently perform best at tool calling, according to the Berkeley Function-Calling Leaderboard, which ranks models on their ability to translate natural language requests into executable code and system commands. But newer open-source models are catching up quickly. Goose's documentation highlights several options with strong tool-calling support: Meta's Llama series, Alibaba's Qwen models, Google's Gemma variants, and DeepSeek's reasoning-focused architectures. The tool also integrates with the Model Context Protocol, or MCP, an emerging standard for connecting AI agents to external services. Through MCP, Goose can access databases, search engines, file systems, and third-party APIs — extending its capabilities far beyond what the base language model provides. Setting Up Goose with a Local Model For developers interested in a completely free, privacy-preserving setup, the process involves three main components: Goose itself, Ollama (a tool for running open-source models locally), and a compatible language model. Step 1: Install Ollama Ollama is an open-source project that dramatically simplifies the process of running large language models on personal hardware. It handles the complex work of downloading, optimizing, and serving models through a simple interface. Download and install Ollama from ollama.com. Once installed, you can pull models with a single command. For coding tasks, Qwen 2.5 offers strong tool-calling support: ollama run qwen2.5 The model downloads automatically and begins running on your machine. Step 2: Install Goose Goose is available as both a desktop application and a command-line interface. The desktop version provides a more visual experience, while the CLI appeals to developers who prefer working entirely in the terminal. Installation instructions vary by operating system but generally involve downloading from Goose's GitHub releases page or using a package manager. Block provides pre-built binaries for macOS (both Intel and Apple Silicon), Windows, and Linux. Step 3: Configure the Connection In Goose Desktop, navigate to Settings, then Configure Provider, and select Ollama. Confirm that the API Host is set to http://localhost:11434 (Ollama's default port) and click Submit. For the command-line version, run goose configure, select "Configure Providers," choose Ollama, and enter the model name when prompted. That's it. Goose is now connected to a language model running entirely on your hardware, ready to execute complex coding tasks without any subscription fees or external dependencies. The RAM, processing power, and trade-offs you should know about The obvious question: what kind of computer do you need? Running large language models locally requires substantially more computational resources than typical software. The key constraint is memory — specifically, RAM on most systems, or VRAM if using a dedicated graphics card for acceleration. Block's documentation suggests that 32 gigabytes of RAM provides "a solid baseline for larger models and outputs." For Mac users, this means the computer's unified memory is the primary bottleneck. For Windows and Linux users with discrete NVIDIA graphics cards, GPU memory (VRAM) matters more for acceleration. But you don't necessarily need expensive hardware to get started. Smaller models with fewer parameters run on much more modest systems. Qwen 2.5, for instance, comes in multiple sizes, and the smaller variants can operate effectively on machines with 16 gigabytes of RAM. "You don't need to run the largest models to get excellent results," Sareen emphasized. The practical recommendation: start with a smaller model to test your workflow, then scale up as needed. For context, Apple's entry-level MacBook Air with 8 gigabytes of RAM would struggle with most capable coding models. But a MacBook Pro with 32 gigabytes — increasingly common among professional developers — handles them comfortably. Why keeping your code off the cloud matters more than ever Goose with a local LLM is not a perfect substitute for Claude Code. The comparison involves real trade-offs that developers should understand. Model Quality: Claude 4.5 Opus, Anthropic's flagship model, remains arguably the most capable AI for software engineering tasks. It excels at understanding complex codebases, following nuanced instructions, and producing high-quality code on the first attempt. Open-source models have improved dramatically, but a gap persists — particularly for the most challenging tasks. One developer who switched to the $200 Claude Code plan described the difference bluntly: "When I say 'make this look modern,' Opus knows what I mean. Other models give me Bootstrap circa 2015." Context Window: Claude Sonnet 4.5, accessible through the API, offers a massive one-million-token context window — enough to load entire large codebases without chunking or context management issues. Most local models are limited to 4,096 or 8,192 tokens by default, though many can be configured for longer contexts at the cost of increased memory usage and slower processing. Speed: Cloud-based services like Claude Code run on dedicated server hardware optimized for AI inference. Local models, running on consumer laptops, typically process requests more slowly. The difference matters for iterative workflows where you're making rapid changes and waiting for AI feedback. Tooling Maturity: Claude Code benefits from Anthropic's dedicated engineering resources. Features like prompt caching (which can reduce costs by up to 90 percent for repeated contexts) and structured outputs are polished and well-documented. Goose, while actively developed with 102 releases to date, relies on community contributions and may lack equivalent refinement in specific areas. How Goose stacks up against Cursor, GitHub Copilot, and the paid AI coding market Goose enters a crowded market of AI coding tools, but occupies a distinctive position. Cursor, a popular AI-enhanced code editor, charges $20 per month for its Pro tier and $200 for Ultra—pricing that mirrors Claude Code's Max plans. Cursor provides approximately 4,500 Sonnet 4 requests per month at the Ultra level, a substantially different allocation model than Claude Code's hourly resets. Cline, Roo Code, and similar open-source projects offer AI coding assistance but with varying levels of autonomy and tool integration. Many focus on code completion rather than the agentic task execution that defines Goose and Claude Code. Amazon's CodeWhisperer, GitHub Copilot, and enterprise offerings from major cloud providers target large organizations with complex procurement processes and dedicated budgets. They are less relevant to individual developers and small teams seeking lightweight, flexible tools. Goose's combination of genuine autonomy, model agnosticism, local operation, and zero cost creates a unique value proposition. The tool is not trying to compete with commercial offerings on polish or model quality. It's competing on freedom — both financial and architectural. The $200-a-month era for AI coding tools may be ending The AI coding tools market is evolving quickly. Open-source models are improving at a pace that continually narrows the gap with proprietary alternatives. Moonshot AI's Kimi K2 and z.ai's GLM 4.5 now benchmark near Claude Sonnet 4 levels — and they're freely available. If this trajectory continues, the quality advantage that justifies Claude Code's premium pricing may erode. Anthropic would then face pressure to compete on features, user experience, and integration rather than raw model capability. For now, developers face a clear choice. Those who need the absolute best model quality, who can afford premium pricing, and who accept usage restrictions may prefer Claude Code. Those who prioritize cost, privacy, offline access, and flexibility have a genuine alternative in Goose. The fact that a $200-per-month commercial product has a zero-dollar open-source competitor with comparable core functionality is itself remarkable. It reflects both the maturation of open-source AI infrastructure and the appetite among developers for tools that respect their autonomy. Goose is not perfect. It requires more technical setup than commercial alternatives. It depends on hardware resources that not every developer possesses. Its model options, while improving rapidly, still trail the best proprietary offerings on complex tasks. But for a growing community of developers, those limitations are acceptable trade-offs for something increasingly rare in the AI landscape: a tool that truly belongs to them. Goose is available for download at github.com/block/goose. Ollama is available at ollama.com. Both projects are free and open source.