JUST IN: UC Berkeley math professor stops grading homework for correctness, saying widespread AI use has made it "pointless," and now awards credit simply for turning in assignments.

Excited to share Genie 4 today our most realistic and interactive world model: - steer dynamic environments in real time, shaping events, camera angles, and actions - generate native audio matched to the world, from realistic background sounds to characters who can converse in real time! - simulate photorealistic scenes and real-world physics - create more coherent multi-step events through reasoning from Gemini We've started to roll out as a research preview to trusted testers. Coming soon to Google AI Ultra subscribers in Project Genie and early access partners via the Gemini API and AI Studio.

I’m sorry, but seeing SO MANY of our youth voting for communism… simply means our schools have catastrophically failed

Many of you don't understand how serious this is, so let me break it down. In computer science there is a famous kind of puzzle called 3-SAT. You are given a long list of yes-or-no switches and a set of rules about how they must be arranged, and you have to find a combination that satisfies every rule. The obvious way to solve it is to try every combination, but each new switch doubles the number of possibilities, so a puzzle with a few hundred switches would take longer than the age of the universe to brute force. For decades, the smartest people in the field found clever tricks that made this a little faster, but every trick still hit the same wall: the time required kept exploding as the puzzle grew. About 25 years ago, two computer scientists, Russell Impagliazzo and Ramamohan Paturi, working with Francis Zane, turned that wall into a formal idea. They proposed the Exponential Time Hypothesis, which says this explosion is not a failure of human cleverness but a law of nature. No algorithm, however brilliant, will ever solve 3-SAT without the time blowing up exponentially. Nobody could prove it, but almost everyone believed it, and it became one of the foundations of modern computer science. Researchers used it as a measuring stick. If you could show that solving some other problem quickly would also crack 3-SAT quickly, you had shown that problem was hopelessly hard too. Hundreds of papers, across scheduling, graphs, logic and much more, rest on this one assumption. Now an internal AI model at OpenAI claims to have broken it. It says it found an algorithm that solves these puzzles meaningfully faster than the hypothesis allows, and it has checked the proof in a computer verification system called Lean. And here is the remarkable part: the very people who proposed the hypothesis, Impagliazzo and Paturi, along with MIT's Ryan Williams, are now leading the public review of whether a machine has disproved their own idea. So what happens next? If the disproof holds, a large part of theoretical computer science has to be revisited. Every result that said "this problem cannot be solved faster, assuming ETH" loses its foundation, and researchers will have to work out which of those walls were real and which were simply where we stopped looking. It does not mean everything becomes easy. The new algorithm is still slow in absolute terms and this is not the famous P versus NP problem being solved. But it means our map of what is possible was wrong in a place we were very confident about, and it was an AI that redrew it. If the disproof fails, the hypothesis survives and the field breathes out, but we will still have watched an AI produce serious, checkable work on one of the deepest questions in the discipline, closely enough that the founders of the idea had to take it seriously. Either way, something has shifted.

deepseek-v4.1-flash-1017-cyber is now available on @inference_net. This is the first of several highly capable cyber models we'll release over the coming weeks. We believe it is our duty as technologists to help people protect themselves and their digital properties from the current onslaught of cybercrime ravaging much of the world. As such, we’re serving our cyber models “at cost”, in US data centers only, with ZDR enabled by default. KYC required. Apply here inference.net/models/deepsee…

TODAY I LET GROK BOT MAKE EVERY SINGLE PHONE CALL FOR ME, AND I CAN’T F*CKING BELIEVE WHAT HAPPENED I decided to run an experiment. Yesterday Elon posted that Grok Bot can now call people and businesses for you, make a request on your behalf and send you a summary of the conversation. So I tested it on my real life. Here’s how my day went: → INTERNET PROVIDER: I told my bot my bill was too high. It called, sat through the menu, asked to be transferred to retention and calmly said I was thinking about switching. 28 minutes later: $35 off every month. Then it did something I would never think of: it asked about hidden fees and made them confirm the new price by email. I just read the live transcript like a Netflix show. → GYM MEMBERSHIP: the one you can “only cancel by phone”. They tried to keep me three times. A discount, a free month, a “pause instead”. My bot said no to all of it, got the cancellation confirmed and sent me the confirmation number. I’d been too lazy to deal with it for two weeks straight. Grok Bot just handled it for me. → BARBER: I needed a fresh cut before the evening. My bot called my barber and booked me for 5 PM. He chatted with it like with a regular client, said “see you later, bro” and hung up. He still doesn’t know he was talking to a bot. → AND THEN IT GOT CRAZY: I asked it to plan a date. First it called a restaurant and booked a table for two at 8 PM. Then it called my girlfriend and invited her to dinner, at the exact place it had just booked. She said yes. Then she texted me “did your AI just ask me out?” Total: almost 2 hours on the phone today. I spent 0 of them. This update is absolutely insane, and I’m still in shock from this experiment. Calls were the last thing I still had to do myself. Now Grok Bot does them better than I do. Bookmark this so you can try the same experiment yourself. And I broke down all the latest major Grok Bot updates in my article below ↓

Investigate your wiener

These two mice are the exact same age, the human equivalent of 85. The mouse on the right was given an antibody blocking a single inflammatory protein (IL-11) starting in late middle age. Starting treatment at human-equivalent age 55: - Extended median lifespan by 25% in both males and females - Prevented grey hair, frailty, and muscle wasting - Cut late-life cancer deaths in half Three anti IL-11 antibodies (that might extend human lifespan) are already in human clinical trials right now.

Announcing three major scientific discoveries, one each in mathematics (harmonic analysis), computer science (complexity theory), and physics (quantum field theory). AI starting to help us improve our understanding of the universe! openai.com/index/building-sc…

JUST IN: South Korean government study reveals paper straws may cause greater environmental harm than conventional plastic straws.