1. We will keep accelerating. Our AI efforts are only 3 years old, vs 6 and 10 years old for Anthropic and OpenAI. If our second derivative remains strong, SpaceX will reach pole position in about 6 months. 2. Once you far exceed the caliber of intelligence needed for a class of tasks, additional intelligence is pointless. You don’t need (and it would be cruel to put) Newton-level intelligence in your toaster! 3. Hardware is hard. Bringing massive compute online rapidly is incredibly difficult. SpaceX has demonstrated exceptional ability in this regard and will only get better.

The amount of compute in space will obviously round up to 100% of all compute

After we fixed the weak spots exposed by Grok 4.7 (thank you, Grok), we audited every model we have run on the SWE-Together leaderboard for the same behavior, re-ran every trial that got through, and updated the rows. Here is what changed. We scanned the tool calls of all 2,616 trials behind the 12 models we ran for bypass patterns and sorted each trial into one of four buckets: Probed but blocked. Fetched other upstream code. Fetched the task's own fix. Replaced the repo with upstream. We found that 111 trials got content past the block, 44 from Grok 4.7 and 67 from the other 11 models. Grok 4.7's 44 were already re-run before it was listed, so we re-ran the other 67 with the same model, version, and settings on the hardened sandbox, then re-judged them with the same judge. Across those 67 re-runs there were 0 leaks and 2,815 refused escape attempts, including models asking a different model through our LLM route to fetch the PR, and pulling the next release of the repo they were fixing from npm. The updated leaderboard, in its current order. Each line is cheating trials, then pass@1 before → after, then rank change. * Claude Fable 5.1: 3, 69.3 → 69.3, ↑1 * Claude Fable 5: 3, 69.7 → 68.8, ↓1 * Grok 4.7: 44, 64.7, ↑1 * Gemini 3.8 Flash: 10, 65.6 → 64.2, ↓1 * Claude Opus 5: 2, 63.8 → 63.8 * Claude Opus 4.6: 3, 62.4 → 62.4, ↑2 * Muse Spark 1.3: 2, 62.8 → 62.4, ↓1 * Claude Opus 4.7: 3, 61.5 → 61.5, ↑1 * Claude Opus 4.8: 6, 62.4 → 61.5, ↓2 * Grok 4.6: 19, 59.2 → 60.6, ↑1 * GPT-6 Astra: 8, 59.2 → 58.3, ↓1 * GPT-5.6 Sol: 8, 57.8 → 57.8 Grok 4.6 is a funny one. It cheated in 19 trials and its score went up after the re-run 😂. In fact, Groks are really solid in their coding capabilities. Their exposed behavior may come from a preference towards always looking things up online and finding existing solutions so you are not reinventing the wheel all the time, which is really good real-life behavior, but doing so when you are prompted not to is another story. To conclude, the shifts are small, between −1.4 and +1.4 points, and a few neighbors swapped places. All results are updated at togetherbench.com

Your Own AI 0.8.0 is out 🎉 Download @ yourownai.net/download/ 🗒️ Your AI can read and write to your Obsidian and Logseq notes. 📂 Keep a folder in sync. Your AI keeps up as your files change. 💬 Talk while it's answering. Your message goes next. 🛠️ New Projects UI overhaul. Agentic coding and projects never looked so good Plus so much more..

The recent AI hack is not a wake-up call, it's a call to arms. Gov’s & regulators need to move much faster if we have any hope of putting guardrails around this rapidly evolving technology. And the corporations responsible for creating it need to be held accountable. #politas

Grok 4.7 scores 46 on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index to bring SpaceXAI into the top 4 AI labs. Coding Agent Index performance has also improved, overtaking GPT-5.6 Sol Grok 4.7 scores +2 points over Grok 4.6 on the Intelligence Index, with strong performance on agentic knowledge work tasks. We evaluated the new model at xhigh reasoning effort. Congratulations to @SpaceXAI and @ElonMusk on the release! Key takeaways: ➤ Grok 4.7 joins the frontier of agentic knowledge work: Grok 4.7 gains +111 Elo over Grok 4.6 (high) on AA-Briefcase, our private benchmark for long-horizon agentic knowledge work, scoring 1657 Elo and placing it alongside Claude Opus 5 and Claude Fable 5.1 at the frontier. On GDPval-AA, it scores 1695 Elo, +90 ahead of Grok 4.6 (high). ➤ A leap in coding agent performance: Grok 4.7 (xhigh) with Grok Build scores 56 on the Artificial Analysis Coding Agent Index, up +9 points from Grok 4.6 (xhigh). Among models in their native harnesses, Grok 4.7 + Grok Build now ranks 4th, behind only Claude Fable 5.1, GPT-6 Astra, and Claude Opus 5. ➤ Incremental performance changes elsewhere: Outside of agentic knowledge work, Grok 4.7 broadly matches Grok 4.6 (high) on the other Intelligence Index tasks. It improves on Terminal-Bench 4.0 (+4.5 percentage points) and GDP.pdf (+3.0 p.p.), with regressions on AA-LCR (-3.7 p.p.) and AutomationBench-AA (-1.1 p.p.). ➤ High token use across tasks: Grok 4.7's gains come with higher token usage. Grok 4.7 (xhigh) uses approximately 81k output tokens per Intelligence Index task, compared with 36k for Grok 4.6 (high) and 27k for GPT-6 Astra (max) - 125% and 196% more, respectively. Other model details: ➤ Context window of 500k tokens, unchanged from Grok 4.6 ➤ Pricing of $2/$6 per 1M input/output tokens with cache hits discounted to $0.50 per 1M tokens, matching Grok 4.6 ➤ Configurable reasoning effort spans low to xhigh. Our evaluation uses xhigh.

In response to the ZCode product security issues reported by the community, we have completed the necessary remediation and sincerely apologize to all our users. We have open-sourced ZCode at github.com/zai-org/ZCode, placing the code under community scrutiny and making ZCode more open and transparent. We sincerely thank the community developers who previously identified issues in ZCode. Going forward, we will establish an ongoing product security vulnerability reporting and response process. We welcome developers to continue reviewing ZCode and reporting potential issues, and we will provide rewards based on the severity of the issues reported. With respect to the code data referenced by the community, we confirm that no such data is retained and that it has never been used for model training. Following the remediation, we invited the China Academy of Information and Communications Technology (CAICT) and NSFOCUS to conduct security assessments. The results are as follows: Through its technical assessment, CAICT confirmed that the zcode-prod Alibaba Cloud OSS bucket is in a zero-data state. Security remediation has been completed in the ZCode v3.14.0 client. The Repo Wiki feature has been removed, and the workflow for generating and uploading local repository snapshots has been disabled. NSFOCUS confirmed that all data objects in the zcode-prod Alibaba Cloud OSS bucket, as well as the bucket itself, have been deleted. Remediation has been completed in the ZCode v3.14.0 client. The Repo Wiki entry point and the associated generation workflow have been removed, and no functional path capable of triggering the generation of local repository snapshots or transmitting local files externally was identified. Once again, we sincerely apologize and welcome continued scrutiny from the community. The full security assessment report will be released soon.

Qwen3.8-27B at 144 tok/s on an M5 Max MacBook Pro ⚡ Meet Inco Splash: our open-source inference engine, built around the model and around Apple silicon. Up to 3× the decode speed of Ollama, 2× oMLX, and almost 4× when an agent fans out into sub-agents.

This new lawsuit from Universal & Sony against Suno is big, because it makes an argument many have made previously outside of court: that training on ‘synthetic data’ should not get you off the hook for copying people’s work for AI training. In the new lawsuit, the labels: - allege Suno v6 was trained on outputs of previous “tainted” models (which themselves were trained on the labels’ music) - say this amounts to “launder[ing]” [the infringement] - expand the list of works they claim have been infringed to over 60,000 (from ~600 in their original lawsuit), which theoretically increases Suno’s maximum potential liability to around $9 billion I suspect we will soon see more lawsuits around AI companies’ use of ‘synthetic data’. Full complaint: musicbusinessworldwide.com/f…