qaz

I feel like everyone knows it's a bubble but that people are expecting it to be like the Dot-com bubble where a small amount of companies succeed, hoping that they invest in those companies.

I checked the repo but there's no code? Just some HTML etc.
It seems like they just plan for this thing to exist but it doesn't actually exist yet?

EDIT: Their explanation:

This repository is currently in its early setup phase.

At the moment, the repository mainly contains project scaffolding, policy files, and the initial project direction. Firmware sources, board support, build instructions, and flashing guidance are still being prepared.

That means zgm is early, but it is intentionally early in public. The goal is not to wait until everything is finished before opening the door. The goal is to make the long-term direction visible and let the project grow into a useful open firmware platform in the open.

I'm not sure if that means that they still have to make it, or that they just have to finish it before publishing it?

The banner at the top of their site tells a different story

Cryptocurrency projects are no longer allowed. View change

I don't like these blanket bans, are they going to ban torrent clients next?

self-training is possible when using something external to validate the results

It seems like the marketing cooperated on writing the incident report, but I felt it was still interesting to share considering the importance on public perception and what it tells about OpenAI's PR strategy

Huggingface actually had to use an open model to analyze the attack because the guardrails of commerical API's caused issues.

When we started the log analysis, we first used frontier models behind commercial APIs. This did not work: the analysis requires submitting large volumes of real attack commands, exploit payloads, and C2 artifacts, and these requests were blocked by the providers' safety guardrails, which cannot distinguish an incident responder from an attacker. We ran the forensic analysis instead on GLM 5.2, an open-weight model, on our own infrastructure. This had a second benefit: no attacker data, and none of the credentials it referenced, left our environment.

Security incident disclosure — July 2026

And Chinese AI like Deepseek and GLM

It could also be a way to encourage more regulation to push out competition with compliance cost

From my personal experience, most companies don't look at the benchmarks and simply buy "AI" from a company based on their perception of that company.

All the Chinese models are scary and "dangerous", Grok too (but for slightly more legitimate reasons), Meta that's Facebook and everyone knows they're bad at privacy (even your boss), so they end up choosing Microsoft's AI, OpenAI, or Anthropic.

And even if they publish the model it's almost always just open weights

According to artificialanalysis.ai's latest benchmarks, it scores better than Opus 4.8 set to max, despite costing half as much per task.

It also beats the top models of some of the largest US tech companies such as xAi, Meta, Google, and Nvidia.

I wonder what the US tech investors will think of this, and what this will mean for the financial AI bubble.