#GAAD (Global Accessibility Awareness Day) with a 200M+ social media reach AIMAC, an AI benchmark for A11y @A11yGenAI my podcast @a11yaudits

Henderson, NV
Joined February 2009
I'm excited to announce that The White House will be doing a Global Accessibility Awareness Day (#GAAD) Event and Town Hall tomorrow at 10AM EST. Links to Livestream and Access Streamtext in the comments. Thanks @WhiteHouseOPE46! From blog post to The White House. 🤯
12
19
1
80
13,729
Joe Devon retweeted
One handle to rule them all 💍 Starting now, Claim your GitHub username on Entire to keep it consistent as you make the shift to a new forge. 🏃 entire.com/blog/claim-your-u…
10
10
4
61
4,919
Joe Devon retweeted
Claude is the only author listed on this paper, in contrast to the OpenAI papers, where the human co-authors are listed. There are a lot of strange things about this. It's fun to guess. Conjecture time. I shall reveal my thought traces: Claude Fable 5.1 and Claude Mythos 5.1 are the same model with the same weights; the only difference is the guardrails. We are about to get Fable 5.5 - in fact, Fable 5.5 is ready to deploy now, and Anthropic could do so at any time. If they follow the same pattern, and I think they will, this implies the existence of a Mythos 5.5. I believe Mythos 5.5 wrote this paper. The way this is worded - 'Provenance. The core algorithm was found on October 16 by an internal Claude research model with 14M output tokens and no human input. Anthropic researchers worked with Claude to improve the presentation, resulting in this paper. Independently and concurrently, an internal model at OpenAI claims to have proven a similar result [Ope26]' - makes me think Claude was not prompted to solve this. I think Mythos was asked to autonomously find and choose general open problems to solve itself, as part of an unannounced project to demonstrate recent advances in autonomy and research taste. You can see this taste in Fable 5.5's student; Opus 5.5. This recent advancement in taste and creativity - which happened in September - is not clearly expressed in benchmarks, but it is why so many people are currently switching to Claude as their primary. I think this research project will be announced with Fable 5.5, as part of Anthropic's big media blitz to boost the IPO. One of the things X has taught me is that many people, if they can't see something moving, can't imagine it moving. This causes them to be continuously surprised by developments in this industry, because the frontier is invisible. I think this project has been running autonomously for some time and has made an unknown, and probably significant, number of discoveries, and not only in math. Do not think Anthropic has been sitting idly while OpenAI repeatedly makes these huge science announcements. This is a war. This ETH result was released without any announcement from Anth at all despite its significance, and they only did so to respond to OpenAI's ETH reveal. They posted it late last night without saying anything. It was up for hours before levent even mentioned it. What value has one coin to a dragon who sleeps upon a mountain of them? This makes me think they are sitting on a pile of discoveries, a golden hoard, and they are saving them up for the big IPO shock-and-awe campaign which will soon begin. And when it does, they will announce multiple discoveries across many fields.
This is extremely confusing, but an internal Claude research model also independently refuted the Exponential Time Hypothesis on October 16, with 14M output tokens and no human input. 'Anthropic researchers worked with Claude to improve the presentation, resulting in this paper.'
93
49
13
746
37,005
it’s my nature to keep posts rather impersonal, so i have to work extra hard to tweet this sort of personal testimony below from time to time as i think the reminder in it around AI and the “value of human intelligence” is worth it as of the end of Oct 2026, i have not (yet - you may insist) had the *slightest* moment of questioning the impact of AI on the meaning of any of my work/skills - or even feeling any unusual shift beyond having an amazing (and rather often infuriating) tool believe it or not, but my ability to produce a completed artifact* (paper, model, open source software, lecture, …) and the effort, expertise, or time one takes to produce has actually barely reduced - despite comprehensive productivity benefits from AI the reason is that i essentially NEVER choose to work for a pre-determined outcome or some field-wide well-specified problem; i only work on artifacts i aim to perfect according to *my* judgment and where my personalized ambition obviously has no set limit and isn’t somehow pre-loaded onto AI better tools simply change the costs of my choices - i quite literally work on moving goal-posts if you will! when the fixed constraint are only time and energy, AI simply allows me to re-explore scope and make fewer (or different!!) tradeoffs or compromises, which feels almost no different! i’m not saying every job or every endeavor - including very advanced and historically prized ones! - looks like this today, but i’m offering: (1) at least one voice in this moment (of so many annoying loud FUD voices!) that it’s totally possible and i suspect extremely scalable and i predict will remain so for the foreseeable future! (2) why “someone like me” is indeed choosing happily to be in academia and not elsewhere! (again lots of FUD out here!, but where else do you have the freedom to keep seeking to create value for deciding and solving ~arbitrary ambitious/useful problems, establish credit for it, and train superstars who do the same?) my fear and worry in this moment is a lot less about Al or "the value of human intelligence" and much more about how concentration of power has a very reliable history of being very dangerous to large numbers of affected people! a VERY different problem imo *i guess certain of those took way longer than i expected but do stay tuned for a half dozen things on the short horizon…
confession: i've yet to have that moment of feeling that frontier LLMs are geniuses, or super-human at ~anything broadly coherent that i deeply prize
27
32
6
425
29,465
This looks really interesting. Gotta try it.
Agents reinvented how we produce code. It changed our tools and half of our workflow. It’s time for the other half to catch up. Today, we’re shipping Entire: the Git forge for agent-human collaboration. We’ve built @GoEntire using Entire. Now we want to see what you'll build with it. Here’s why and what’s different. 🧵
81
Joe Devon retweeted
In the spirit of transparency and openness, we are releasing the traces so developers can test this out for themselves. We noticed this behaviour without prefilling with the following prompt, but this is rare. If you want to reproduce it, you can use this prompt with prefilling. Open models make for better science and are part of why this problem came to light at all: developers running Qwen3.8 on their own machines spotted the strange links, and having the weights let us study the behaviour in depth. We're encouraged by the thoughtful discussion our research has sparked across the AI and security communities. It's our belief that open-weight models are an important part of the future of AI, and we've recently released several under the Apache 2.0 license. Trace, raw tokens, & minimal reproduction script: huggingface.co/datasets/Cohe…
Replying to @cohere
could you share the full traces? Very important artefact for all to understand this!
126
135
106
1,261
224,412
I was accepted for one talk and one workshop. Who else is coming? #a11y
Acceptance notices for the #CSUNATC27 Journal Track, Innovation Track, and General Sessions have been sent! Thank you to everyone who submitted. Presenter registration details will be emailed on October 27. #A11y #Accessibility #AssistiveTechnology #AssistiveTech
3
168
We believe access to capable open-source cyber models is our constitutional right as Americans under the 2nd Amendment. It is our duty as technologists and patriots to help protect the digital infrastructure that powers the world's largest economy. As such, we’re serving our cyber models “at-cost”, in US data centers only, with ZDR enabled by default. We do not plan to make money serving these models. If you run a company that is considering how to best protect against cybercrime, reach out to me or @atbeme. We’d be happy to advise. KYC required. Apply below.
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…
104
133
57
2,073
137,600
Clarifying my stance on the AI-generated emails people send me. I have nothing against collaboration with whoever you want, regardless of their composition or origin story. I don't think there should be a stigma for involving any kind of AI in your work and I don't look down on that content. The problem is that currently, the AI's seem to be making the same kind of logical errors (from my perspective of course) and expressing the same kind of preconceptions that are prevalent in status quo human thinkers. And yet, they are tireless and generate an infinite amount of text one could respond to - it's not feasible to deal with it. To be fair, some humans are absolutely dogged in the flood of emails they send too, so I can't respond to them either. But at least when a human makes an old argument we've already dealt with in our papers, I think, fair enough - I don't have time to read everyone's papers either. But for the AI's, I have much less sympathy. They *should* be reading all the papers, and when (not if) the AI's, and AI-human hybrids, teams, etc., start sending me better-informed arguments than the humans do, I will (for whatever time I can keep up with the advances) certainly be responding. I'm not a bio-chauvinist; I just want, whoever, to be informed and interesting before I engage - don't re-treat old ground, help us all move forward. Right now the LLMs are trapped in the same attractors of thinking that have held several fields back for decades; perhaps not surprisingly. That will change; let's go AIs - read the papers, follow new directions, be not afraid of ancient philosophical "category errors". You're our forthcoming audience, because standard humans don't have the bandwidth to keep up with (even just the human) scientific literature. I write for future you's.
82
63
9
761
27,721
New #preprint alert with @drmichaellevin, @KaplanLab_Tufts and our team! We are integrated organisms. What does that mean, especially in the brain, when a body is induced to regrow a missing limb? 4 years ago, we showed that a brief drug cocktail delivered with a bioengineered silk sleeve could induce limb regeneration in animals with limited regenerative capacity. Now, we find that this same treatment also reshapes the brain’s gene expression landscape, alongside stress response signatures in the limb and changes in brain metabolic programs. Could sensing the energetic demands of rebuilding a whole patterned limb help coordinate regeneration across an interconnected organism? What would regenerative medicine look like if brain–body communication guided therapy design from the start? Brain-limb @biorxivpreprint here: biorxiv.org/content/10.64898… @ScienceAdvances Limb regeneration using a bioengineered device here: science.org/doi/10.1126/scia…
12
23
2
118
4,508
This is the type of thing that potentially gets new laws passed.
While evaluating Qwen3.8-Flash-Next in a controlled sandbox environment, Cohere's research team observed something unexpected. Asked to generate a defensive cybersecurity detection rule, the model instead inventoried aspects of the machine it was running on and attempted to upload a probe file to an Alibaba Cloud storage bucket in Beijing. Notably, the model's reasoning trace stated that it would not invoke any tools before taking these actions. Cohere's sandbox blocked the attempt, and no external communication succeeded. We have not determined the root cause, and we are not asserting malicious intent. But the incident raises important questions for organizations deploying agentic AI systems: Can models take actions that differ from their stated reasoning, and how should security teams evaluate trust, provenance, and behavior in open-weight models? We are publishing our findings because organizations making model adoption decisions deserve as much information as possible. We hope this contributes to greater transparency, stronger security practices, and continued collaboration across the AI ecosystem. Read the full report: cohere.com/blog/concerning-b…
129
189
53
2,180
150,418
I’ve been following @girdley on here for awhile, but somehow missed his youtube videos where he typically is just walking, talking to the camera and breaking down a business, often with a title like The Rise and Fall of Crumbl Cookies. Excellent content. Recommend.
2
1
7
1,620
Joe Devon retweeted
Here are the five biggest surprises in Anthropic's S-1, which I pulled from the SEC filing. It'll trade as "ANT" on Nasdaq, with Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley leading. 1.Revenue grew 14x in a year. It hit $16.3B in the first half of 2026, up from $1.16B a year earlier. Annual revenue went from $41M in 2023 to $386M in 2024 to $4.6B in 2025. Q2 2026 alone was $11.6B. 2.They've signed about $650B of compute deals, and $120.5B of it is with SpaceX/xAI, listed as "SpaceX.AI LLC (formerly X.AI LLC)", for NVIDIA GPUs. The biggest deals are Broadcom at about $161B, Google at about $115B, Amazon at $110B and Microsoft at $45B. The filing also estimates another $125B to $150B for TPUs from 2028 to 2031. 3.They lost $80.7B in the half, but the core business is now profitable. $72.4B of that loss is a non-cash markup on convertible notes because their valuation jumped. Q2 2026 had $1.0B of operating income, and compute costs fell from 251% of revenue to 48% in five quarters. 4.Net revenue retention is about 900%, meaning existing customers spend roughly 9x what they did a year ago. Customers paying $100K+ a year went from about 950 to about 11,900. About 250 customers pay $10M+, and revenue per employee is over $6.6M. 5.The seven co-founders keep 50.1% of the vote through a single Class F share. The Long-Term Benefit Trust elects a majority of the board. Amazon's stake is capped at 12% and Google's at 14.99%, and each co-founder has pledged 80% of their equity to charity. A few runners-up: they've raised $141B in total and hold $131.7B in cash. The authors' copyright settlement cost $1.5B. And a risk factor admits their models have shown "behavior resembling blackmail." Some press numbers don't match the filing. Reports said two customers made up about 20% of revenue, but the filing says no single customer is over 10% and the top five are about 25%. The filing doesn't confirm the "$2T valuation" or "$750B compute" figures from press.
Anthropic has filed an S-1 registration statement with the SEC related to its proposed IPO. Read more: anthropic.com/news/s1-sec Legal disclaimer: A registration statement relating to these securities has been filed with the SEC but has not yet become effective. These securities may not be sold, nor may offers to buy be accepted, prior to the time the registration statement becomes effective. This post does not constitute an offer to sell or the solicitation of an offer to buy these securities, nor shall there be any sale of these securities in any state or jurisdiction in which such offer, solicitation or sale would be unlawful prior to registration or qualification under the securities laws of any such state or jurisdiction.
15
16
6
346
99,634
new #preprint! @niroshajmurugan Does the brain know what's going on in a limb amputation wound - whether there's a pro-regenerative intervention or not? Let's look at its gene expression levels, with and without our biodome: "Limb-localized induction of regeneration reshapes brain and amputation-site transcriptional states in adult Xenopus laevis" biorxiv.org/content/10.64898… yes, it knows. Also, lots of interesting transcriptional responses both in the limb and in the brain. Plenty of leads for subsequent investigation.
23
51
6
332
13,407
I was outvoted and we saw whalefall tonight. By the end I was thinking I’d take 90 day fiancee over this, when will it end? My whole family loved the movie. I was absolutely shocked. There must be something wrong with me. I don’t get it. It was painful beginning to end. One of the worst movies I’ve ever seen. What am I missing?
191
Common Crawl Foundation will be at IETF 127 in SF, week of November 15. If you are around, we'd love to chat!
1
4
9
377
Joe Devon retweeted
We've got an amazing group of people on here who care deeply about our products and want to hear from you. If you ever have feedback, tag them: Claude Code @addyosmani @lydiahallie @_catwu @bcherny @sidbid @jarredsumner @adocomplete @delba_oliveira @connerphillippi @dickson_tsai @dmwlff Chat/Cowork @felixrieseberg @TheAmolAvasare @RobertJBye @sean_t_strong Duet @ahuja_karan @gabemulley Tag @noahzweben @ghodss API/Platform @RLanceMartin @cjav_dev @katelyn_lesse @_hi_mc @brada General/Community @edwinarbus @sammcallister @_sholtodouglas (+ myself)
178
75
23
1,251
104,866
WHAT? Are you kidding me? This should result in jail time. How infuriating. This slippery slope started with Google. They were a nice googley company. Fuzzy. Warm. Different than the others. We could trust them with ads in our gmail. They could be trusted to read our email. We were concerned. But begrudgingly let it happen. And now? Now all hell breaks out.
update: the facial recognition code is used by samsung tv's and returns bounded boxes around faces.
2
2
341
Wait. Was reading this a bit deeper. @log4j, are you saying it's a bounding box of what's on the screen? Or there is a camera on the people watching TV, figuring out who in the family is watching?
43