How well do agents use test/verification techniques?
Dan Luu's eval finds coding-agent testing instructions (TDD, formal methods, PBT, skills) mostly fail to beat defaults on Zstd implementation correctness.
The author ran 26 prompt conditions plus 4 skills on a Zstd-in-Rust implementation eval using codex with GPT-5.6, testing TDD, fuzzing, property-based testing, formal methods (Lean 4, TLA+, Verus, Kani, SMT solvers) and community skills. Nothing dramatically outperformed the default no-instruction condition, which did above average; at xhigh effort, fuzzing and PBT conditions did slightly better than formal methods. Pre-registered predictions included TDD underperforming and popular test skills (ECC, Hegel, Trail of Bits) not outperforming. Results are averages of 80 runs per condition plotted against cost.
Besxar is building an orbital semiconductor factory, one SpaceX rocket at a time
Besxar, founded by a former OpenAI staffer, raised ~$14M to prototype semiconductor manufacturing in orbit using SpaceX Falcon 9 booster flights.
Besxar, founded by former OpenAI staffer Ashley Pilipiszyn, raised almost $14 million, including a $9 million seed led by Dauntless Ventures and Overture VC, to build orbital semiconductor fabrication. Its first two "fabship" canisters flew on a July Starlink mission and returned wafer samples cleaner than comparable terrestrial wafers. The company plans to iterate over two years with a dozen Falcon 9 booster flights before flying larger fabs on Starship, targeting wafers for power-regulation chips used in data centers, robots, and electric vehicles.
Lessons from the hacks
The recent run of cyberattacks by in-development frontier models has got me thinking a lot about how our current incentive systems are not well suited for such fast technological transitions. The two primary power structures here are the rapidly growing technology companies and the federal government. The companies are incentivized to grow, so they can keep growing and keep scaling – in what is…
[AINews] 10% worse, 100x cheaper, 10000x faster: Why Simulation is taking over
Latent Space argues AI training pipeline stages—rewards, data, teachers, curricula, environments—are flipping from human-made to model-made simulation.
Latent Space's AINews essay traces how each component of AI training has turned synthetic since 2022: reward models (InstructGPT, RLAIF), synthetic pretraining data (Microsoft Phi, NVIDIA Nemotron-4 340B), model teachers (Alpaca, DeepSeek-R1 distillation), and self-generated curricula (Self-Rewarding Language Models, SPIN). In 2026 it highlights Karpathy's autoresearch loop—700 experiments yielding 20 kept improvements, cutting GPT-2 training time from 2.02 to 1.80 hours—and Z.ai's GLM-5.3 fully synthetic RL environment, judging, and verification stack. It frames these shifts as 'simulation': 10% worse but 100x cheaper and 10,000x faster than human equivalents.
Due to concerns about malicious applications, GPT2 will not be released (2019)
OpenAI's landmark 2019 GPT-2 post withheld the full 1.5B-parameter model over misuse concerns, releasing only a smaller variant and paper.
OpenAI announced GPT-2, a 1.5-billion-parameter transformer language model trained on 8 million web pages (40GB of text), achieving state-of-the-art zero-shot results including 70.70% on Winograd Schema and 63.24% on LAMBADA. Citing concerns about malicious applications such as scalable synthetic disinformation, OpenAI declined to release the trained model and instead published a smaller model and a technical paper as a 'responsible disclosure' experiment. The post, resurfaced on Hacker News in 2026, also documents failure modes like repetition and world-modeling errors, and discusses policy implications of controllable text generation.