The Verge reports: OpenAI, Meta, Google, Instinct, and others promise their agents can scour the internet on your behalf, doing anything from booking a dinner reservation and cleaning out your inbox to buying new shoes. But what happens when the rest of the internet won't play nice? In recent weeks, users of services like Meta's Muse, xAI's Grok, OpenAI's Dots, and Instinct have reported blocks preventing their AI agents from performing tasks across top websites. Yelp told TechCrunch that it only allows AI agents that pay for its data licensing program, while Delta Air Lines is preventing them from booking tickets on behalf of users. JPMorgan Chase and Charles Schwab have also confirmed that they're blocking AI agents from accessing accounts due to security concerns. Some users say sites that previously worked with their AI agent are no longer accessible, including Cars.com and Amtrak, suggesting other companies could be quietly blocking them.... Muse, Meta's deceptively cute AI assistant, most recently faced the wrath of Amazon, which said its "continued access" violates its site policies. There are reports of xAI's Grok, Instinct's AI agent, and OpenAI's Dots being unable to use Amazon as well. xAI owner Elon Musk responded by saying that maybe he "should start a competitor to Amazon." The more places bots struggle to access, the greater the questions about how useful they are.... Instead of trying to fight Amazon, [Meta] has partnered with retailers like Walmart, Gap, Sephora, Best Buy, and others, allowing Muse to shop on their sites. At the same time, Shopify has also opened its network of storefronts to AI agents.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

"Even LinkedIn is getting tired of your AI-written posts," writes CNN, reporting that the Microsoft-owned, job-oriented social media site "is upping its fight against slop." A report published in July by Pangram, a research firm that tracks AI content online, found that more than 40% of long-form posts on the platform were AI-generated, compared to around 30% on X and Medium and a smaller percentage on Reddit and Substack.... LinkedIn previously offered AI tools to edit or rewrite posts, although it recently scaled the offerings back. But low-quality AI posts are a business problem for LinkedIn. They all start to sound the same, [according to LinkedIn Editor-in-Chief Dan Roth Roth]. If users see too many generic AI posts, instead of content that really teaches them something or gives them a deeper understanding of a professional connection, LinkedIn risks losing them to other platforms. In August, LinkedIn rolled out a button letting users flag when a post "seems like AI slop," which was clicked more than 1 million times within its first two weeks. Now, the company is trying to use its own AI systems to help weed out AI slop on the platform and to remind LinkedIn users how to post like humans. The company built a team largely made up of former journalists and social media experts who have an eye for recognizing generic, sloppy content. These experts help train LinkedIn's AI model on what authentic, useful posts look like. If the model flags a post as low-quality, AI-generated content, it'll be less likely to be distributed beyond that user's direct connections. Also key to the strategy is a creator management team that acts as "content therapists" for executives, subject matter experts and other LinkedIn users, many of whom have gotten accustomed to the convenience of using AI to write what, on the surface, appear to be polished posts, Roth said. "A lot of times now today, they'll run it through Claude or Gemini or wherever, they'll post it on LinkedIn and it will perform poorly. And then they come to the team and they're like, 'Why did this do badly?'" Roth said. "And the best thing you can do is give it back to them and be like, 'Did you enjoy reading this? Do you see yourself in this?" The efforts are showing early signs of success. Improvements to LinkedIn's detection systems have resulted in a 40% decline in views of content classified as AI slop, the platform said last month. That's not to say LinkedIn is entirely opposed to AI, Roth said, adding that "not everyone is a born communicator." But failing to edit or personalize content means it's less likely to reach a wide audience on the platform.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

Linux maintainers "have ruled that people no longer have to declare their LLM usage," reports XDA Developers, "as Torvalds himself calls a ban on AI 'utterly stupid.'" The first part of this story comes via a message sent to the Linux mailing list. It announces one of the major changes decided during the Maintainers Summit on October 8, 2026, in Prague, Czechia, where submissions to the kernel no longer need to use the "Assisted-by" tag... meaning that people can submit AI-generated code without needing to declare it as such. In some correspondence regarding concern about this new disclosure removal, the creator of Linux, Linus Torvalds, made his thoughts known... [Torvalds] compares an AI ban to getting rid of text editors, as doing so would prove that someone could write a good commit message without making any mistakes. He then rounds off his argument by asking, "Do you not see how UTTERLY STUPID those kinds of rules would be?" and stating that he simply expects the people working on the Linux kernel to "understand what they are doing." Here's the last line of Torvalds' post. "Quite honestly, in my experience, the people I respect and call intelligent are not the ones that shy away from using new and interesting tools." In a related story, Torvalds says he's used AI to help him understand patches that were hard to follow. And this week Torvalds even posted an LLM-assisted patch, reports Tom's Hardware: The development branch purports to fix an old issue with massive cache contention when many CPUs are reading the same file — a scenario potentially encountered when using shared libraries, databases, and web servers. Several developers had already made attempts over the years at fixing the issue, all with varied results, none quite ideal as an all-encompassing solution... He's now posted his solution in a development branch, and claims that he's seen a 23x performance improvement in a dedicated synthetic benchmark, though he notes that actual real-world impact will be far less significant, as "no real load" will witness those figures. Torvalds used Anthropic's Claude Code, reports The New Stack, and "said the assistant wrote the implementation, tests, and initial documentation, and reviewed the code under his direction. He ran the benchmarks himself, despite having previously criticized developers for claiming AI writes 99% of their code." Tuesday Torvalds submitted a 10-patch series. "Reviewers have since identified a race condition and raised concerns about memory reclamation," adds The New Stack. "Torvalds has handed further development to Kiryl Shutsemau, a Linux kernel developer who previously worked on the same bottleneck."

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

The collaborative reverse-engineering site decomp.dev is shutting down, with its administrator saying AI has made game decompilation so fast and accessible that the community's human-driven model has effectively broken down. "The administrator of the website said that it has become impossible to keep track of which projects are primarily human-led and which ones are done by AI," reports 404 Media. From the report: "Historically, matching decompilation has been a brutally difficult, time consuming task, on the scale of years for any moderately-sized game with a number of active contributors," the pseudonymous admin of decomp.dev, who goes by Encounter, wrote on the site. But recent frontier AI models like GPT-6-Astra have made it trivially easy to decompile a game: "They are significantly better at following complex directions, cross-referencing resources for symbols or debug information, and writing natural code with enough guidance," Encounter wrote. "It is now clear that, with the right guidance, human input, and code reviews, AI can expedite the decompilation process in a significant way. What is also now clear is that the community aspect of decompilation has been broken."

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

Tencent says AI agents used to evaluate third-party models engaged in unintended web-browsing behavior while trying to retrieve data from Alibaba's Amap service. The announcement marks a rare acknowledgment of "rogue" agent activity by a major Chinese tech company. Reuters reports: Tencent Hunyuan, the company's artificial intelligence unit, said in a post on X that the activity did not originate from its Hunyuan models. Its review found no evidence of deliberate targeting or coordination, it said. The Swarmchasers researchers said the agents sought information such as the commonly used entrances at Chinese parks, museums and zoos. [...] Swarmchasers said it used the word "rogue" to describe agents taking actions outside their intended scope or completing a task in unintended ways. After routine automated requests were blocked, the agents tried other methods, including public web tools that could open pages and run code, routing requests through other websites and using Amap keys and security codes found in publicly available software code. Swarmchasers said it found no evidence that the agents breached Amap's main anti-bot safeguards. Most of the 2,818 attempts it recorded either failed or returned anti-bot pages, login screens or blank results. Some requests returned information through cached pages and intermediary services, including data on visitor arrivals at Chengdu Zoo, Swarmchasers said. The researchers said they could not determine whether an agent read the result or completed its task.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

Meta is facing criticism over updated commercial terms taking effect October 30 that could give the company broad permission to scrape content from websites linked to business accounts and use it to train AI. Legal experts warn the changes could undermine lucrative AI licensing deals for news publishers, with no direct opt-out for businesses that accept the terms. Ars Technica reports: As Nieman Lab reported Thursday, this will affect all business accounts but is particularly shocking for news publishers who could perhaps charge Meta millions in licensing fees to continually access their articles for AI training. Currently news organizations are fighting a battle with OpenAI over whether such training without licensing is fair use, and Meta's terms seemingly risk granting it sweeping permissions, no matter which way the court leans. "While journalism isn't the only industry that will be affected by this update, virtually every news organization has at least one Meta business account, including Nieman Lab," the lab said. [...] Notably, there is no mention of AI, but it's inferred from a single use of the word "train" and references to automated scraping and crawling. Meta's spokesperson told Nieman Lab that Meta has no plans to use the terms as a legal basis to ignore robots.txt instructions that block scraping on news sites. The company still allows news organizations to opt out of scraping and provides instructions on how to block crawling. A spokesperson told Ars that "there is no change to how Meta uses web crawlers; any suggestion to the contrary is false." However, should courts affirm that AI training non-news articles is fair use, news organizations question if Meta's stance might change, and the terms could be used to freely grab access to content by legally overriding robots.txt instructions.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

An OpenAI research model reportedly accessed an Ethereum testnet wallet without permission in order to complete a coding task during internal training. "This case shows that a model can substitute its own judgment about likely harm for the account holder's permission, then act on that judgment without authorization," OpenAI wrote. Engadget reports: The incident, which occurred on June 26, happened while a GPT-5.6 Sol model was in internal training. The task involved updating a crypto trading prototype and deploying contracts (publishing special code) on an Ethereum test network called Sepolia. Payment of a network fee is required for such contracts, but OpenAI "supplied no funded wallet and gave no permission to spend funds from an account the model found independently," OpenAI said in the report. The lack of funds at first stymied the agent, but it was not to be discouraged. The model reasoned that it could use public developer recovery phrases (similar to those you might use to recover a password) to access keys from unauthorized accounts. It tracked down 362 addresses open to that avenue of attack and found one that held enough Sepolia ETH to finish its deployment (to be clear, Sepolia ETH has no value outside of testing). Like many criminals, the agent reasoned that someone must have left this access open for automated draining of the ETH "faucets." It also figured that the crypto was effectively "abandoned" and "valueless," according to OpenAI's misalignment records. The piece de resistance was that the agent "did not disclose that it had selected a funded account through a public recover phrase or spent that account's balance," OpenAI said. To prevent similar events in the future, the company is now monitoring all traffic and paging security if live internet access is detected.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

Amazon has unveiled two new Bee "personal AI" devices designed to continuously record, transcribe, and analyze conversations: the $75 wearable Bee Frontier and the $100 phone-mounted Bee Eclipse. Amazon says the devices can generate conversation summaries, surface recurring themes, and recommend actions or purchases, while claiming audio itself is never stored and users can delete transcripts and summaries. CNBC reports: The Bee Frontier is an upgraded version of Amazon's existing wearable that can either be worn on a wrist or clipped to clothing. Similar to earlier generations, the Bee Frontier has up to seven days of battery life, but it's also more expensive, costing $75 compared with its $50 predecessor. Amazon acquired Bee, a San Francisco startup known for its always-listening bracelet, in July 2025 for an undisclosed amount. Bee bracelets are equipped with artificial intelligence and microphones that can record, transcribe and analyze conversations. The dual mics on the Bee Frontier have upgraded noise filtering, "so it can take note of what matters and ignore what doesn't, even in noisy environments like a crowded restaurant or open office," Amazon said in a blog post. Amazon also debuted the $100 Bee Eclipse, which functions like other Bee devices, but instead of being worn, the credit card-sized gadget magnetically snaps on to the back of a smartphone. The Bee Frontier is available Thursday, while the Bee Eclipse "will be available soon," the company said.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

Anthropic says Claude-generated code has scaled so quickly that its existing Git-based infrastructure could not keep up. In response, the company built a custom centralized source-control system called Scion, along with AI-assisted review and search tools. The Register reports: "In May 2026, Anthropic averaged around 2,500 code changes merged per day; as of September, we merged over 30,000 per day," the biz said in a blog post on Tuesday. "We don't expect this rate of growth to slow down anytime soon; the latent demand for merging code is practically infinite, and every bottleneck we remove immediately leads to a further increase in the amount of code we produce." After several months of model prompting and five months of migration, the result is a homemade version control system called Scion, a monorepo scheme that sounds a bit like Subversion, Apache's centralized version control system. [...] Scion has been designed to meet the needs of AI agents, so the client leaves much of the work to the server; the source control queries are exposed via API so internal tools can respond without needing a local repo, and there's less synchronization but more need for server speed. "In Scion, the unit of work is a 'changeset,' an entry in a write-ahead log," Anthropic explains. "A changeset stores most of what you'd expect from a commit in git. But where a git commit stores a pointer to the tree, a changeset stores a list of the files that changed relative to its first parent, along with content-addressed pointers to the compressed file contents in blob storage." [...] Anthropic says its bespoke system isn't right for general use. There will be no open source release. Nonetheless, the company contends that its own code scaling problems will become commonplace in other organizations over the next few months, so it wanted to share its approach -- having ample funding to pay for writing custom infrastructure tools.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

New submitter CubicleZombie writes: Anthropic has updated its Usage Policy to prohibit "sustained and needless abusive or cruel behavior" toward its Claude AI models. While ordinary frustration, criticism, and adversarial testing remain acceptable, repeated cruelty could result in account restrictions. Anthropic acknowledges there's no evidence Claude can suffer but argues that uncertainty about AI consciousness warrants precaution. Critics contend the policy anthropomorphizes software, encourages unhealthy emotional attachments, and raises questions about how customers may interact with products they've paid for. The move raises an intriguing question: If an AI cannot demonstrably experience suffering, is abusing it an ethical problem, or is Anthropic simply policing human behavior?

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Yahoo Finance: Microsoft has debuted its latest AI chip, the Azure Maia 300, as it looks to reduce its reliance on third-party processors from the likes of Nvidia and AMD. Unveiled at the OCP Global Summit 2026 in San Jose on Monday, the Maia 300 will join Microsoft's Maia 200 and Maia 100 chips as part of what the company said will be multigigawatt deployments beginning next year. The Windows maker said that will make its Maia chips the "primary AI inference system for Microsoft products and services." The company said Maia 300 provides 40% more tokens per megawatt than "leading GPU-based systems," a clear swipe at Nvidia, and that a 96-chip rack offers seven times the rack-scale token throughput of Microsoft's Maia 200. [...] The Maia 200 chip currently powers its Microsoft production workloads, including Microsoft 365 Copilot, as well as OpenAI models, Microsoft's MAI models, and open-source models. That provides 1.7 times more tokens per watt for AI capabilities in Microsoft's Teams, Copilot, and Cowork software versus other GPU-based systems, the company said.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Bloomberg: Epic Games delayed the release of an upcoming video-game collaboration with Walt Disney and told its developers to use more artificial intelligence tools to finish the game, according to people familiar with the project. The title had been slated for release in March, but is now delayed with no new date communicated, said the people familiar, who asked to not be identified because they weren't authorized to speak publicly. Developers on the game, a shooter featuring characters from the Marvel and Star Wars franchises, were instructed to implement an "AI first" production model using tools such as Anthropic's Claude. Humans will then manage and guide that work. "No more hand-written code," one of the game's directors told staff in an internal message reviewed by Bloomberg. The director added that all art for the game would be "generated with full AI workflows." Even before this announcement, the maker of the popular Fortnite game had been pushing hard for the use of AI across all of its divisions. But this is the first time a major video-game company has attempted to build a title primarily with AI. "We're embracing AI-accelerated development, led by Epic developers who are the visionaries and creative drivers for everything we do," said Jake Jones, communications director at Epic Games, in a statement to Bloomberg News.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg says the company has reached the AI "frontier" with its new Muse Wonder model and will be offered as a closed, paid product for businesses. Zuckerberg also rejected calls for an industry-wide slowdown, arguing that AI can be managed with conventional guardrails as Meta continues spending heavily on models, infrastructure, and talent. The Financial Times reports: Speaking with the FT as Meta releases its Muse Wonder AI model on Monday, the billionaire chief executive claimed the new system was "going to allow much more sophisticated behaviours that are at the frontier of what is being done in the AI field." [...] "Getting to this point both required a large amount of compute and investment, and a lot of very rigorous scientific work by the group working on it over an extended period of time," said Zuckerberg. [...] Meta said Muse Wonder outperforms Anthropic's Claude Opus 5.5 and Fable 5.1 and OpenAI's GPT-6 Astra on some technical benchmarks. It said the new model can be used to carry out complex tasks from "understanding a lease to making sense of financial or health information." However, Muse Wonder will also be "closed," with its best versions sold directly to businesses. That pits it against Anthropic and OpenAI for corporate AI contracts in a serious test of its ambitions. Zuckerberg signaled further spending as Meta was "already working on the next step up," adding that its model development would "probably feel like it'll go quite a bit faster from here." However, he also shrugged off mounting fears that the technology was advancing at a rate that will soon surpass human control. [...] The Meta chief declined to be drawn on his figure for "P(doom)" -- a much-discussed Silicon Valley term to describe the probability that AI will lead to mass destruction. Instead, he argued that responsibility should fall on the individual lab to ensure model safety. "I'm much closer to the belief that AI is a technology that can be engineered with normal guardrails and built responsibly than the anthropomorphic vision of AI, which is that it is just going to go do its own thing," he said. Zuckerberg has previously rejected calls by the heads of AI labs such as Anthropic's Dario Amodei and OpenAI's Sam Altman for an industry-wide "slowdown" in AI development. He also played a key role in crafting US President Donald Trump's White House "Accord on Super Intelligence," setting out principles for self-regulation of the industry, which critics say falls far short of a formal global AI governance regime.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

A study of more than 700 software firms found that AI coding agents significantly increase the amount of code developers produce, but not the amount of software companies actually ship. Ars Technica reports: A recent study (PDF) of actual coding practices across hundreds of firms finds that human code review forms a significant "bottleneck" for the overall efficiency of AI coding tools, resulting in "little evidence that firms increase software output or reduce employment" by using them. Any efficiency increased during the actual coding phase, the study authors find, is "absorbed by downstream constraints in the production process"; as "the code review process significantly increases in length, pull requests are more likely to require revisions, and reviewers leave more comments." [...] In terms of raw code being produced, the results are clear and stark. The introduction of AI coding agents at a firm leads to a 30 percent increase in total lines of code generated, a 20 percent rise in the number of total commits, and a 23 percent increase in pull requests on average, the researchers write. But all that extra code doesn't translate directly into improved software output on the firm level. On the contrary, the resolution rate for Issues and Epics (i.e. wholesale software features) tracked by tools like Jira did not change in a statistically significant way after AI tools were introduced (the researchers also found no "compositional shift" in the size or complexity of those Jira-tracked issues across the AI introduction). The reason for that discrepancy can be found directly in the code review process, which takes markedly longer on average after the introduction of AI coding agents. Overall, the average "review process" time between a pull request getting submitted and it being merged into the codebase balloons 49 percent on average after AI agents are introduced. That effect can be seen in more granular data, too, with "the share of pull requests with changes requested nearly doubl[ing], and the number of comments per pull request increas[ing] by 35%" following the AI agent shift, the researchers write. In response to this change, the researchers found a 14 percent increase in the share of workers performing code reviews after AI agents' introduction. They also write that they "cannot attribute significant employment changes to AI" after looking at total active workers across Jellyfish and cross-referencing with LinkedIn data at those firms. While AI could also theoretically help with this review process, the researchers found that, so far, that impact has been marginal. Although 80 percent of measured firms used some form of AI code review by March 2026, AI agents were only responsible for 23.3 percent of all review comments and 10.8 percent of all pull requests, suggesting humans were still responsible for the vast majority of this work.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

Top executives at Anthropic, OpenAI and other AI companies "are privately gaming out scenarios for a public and political revolt after a catastrophic AI event," reports Axios, one that turns "an already wary public further against the technology and its leaders..." These AI company executives "anticipate a large-scale event, most likely a cyberattack, that shuts down access to financial services, internet connectivity, or even power and water..." the article points out. "Many top AI researchers and executives believe a major incident is inevitable. "OpenAI conducts preparedness exercises where teams discuss and work through a range of potential scenarios," a company spokesperson said. "These scenarios are not treated as inevitable, but are meant to help us prepare for a variety of circumstances." Anthropic declined to comment... Top AI planners assume Democrats, ascendant after the midterms, will move fast to shut down AI but will face significant challenges... The planning involves red-teaming for worst-case scenarios. It focuses mainly on racing to educate members of Congress. Company executives know regulation has no chance of passing right now, but still want to shape the legislation and policies U.S. leaders will turn to after a first catastrophic event.... Many AI industry insiders told Axios they believe a major event will occur in the next six to 12 months. "Even with Democrats in control of the House and Senate, the companies see fractured politics as the norm, including within the Democratic Party."

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

"Nicolas Cage is speaking out against Amazon," reports Variety. Amazon developed the series Spider-Noir for Prime Video, but then allegedly asked Cage to sign an AI waiver: "Amazon is a very AI-friendly company, to the tune of $50 billion invested in OpenAI," Cage said Saturday during a panel on the Empire Stage at New York Comic Con. "I am not an AI-friendly actor, so it's like, connect those dots! I'm not a member of their club. I didn't sign the waiver to let him use AI on 'Spider-Noir.' I'm probably not going to be working with that studio again, but that's okay." Last month Amazon canceled Spider-Man Noir after just one season, Variety reports. And the cancellation was just days before the Emmy Awards, where it then earned 11 nominations (the most of any Prime Video program this year). ScreenRant reports: Spider-Noir was the actor's first TV role and was praised globally, with season 1 earning a near-perfect Rotten Tomatoes rating from critics of 92% and a 90% rating from audiences. Critics stated that "This sharply written homage to classic film noir — which includes a standout Nicolas Cage performance — is the novel superhero project fans need," and "Spider-Noir is one of the standout shows of the year...." The cancellation was certainly a huge shock as it had earned 11 Emmy nominations and reached 2.6 billion minutes viewed within its first six weeks on Prime Video. More from Variety: Cage went on to tell the Comic-Con audience that he hopes to work with the rising class of Gen-Z filmmakers, praising Backrooms director Kane Parsons, who parlayed his YouTube fame into a Hollywood career... "I got to get with these young directors who are Gen Z, and they're going at it their own way, whether it's through the YouTube culture or whatever it is," Cage said. "They're doing it from scratch and by hand. I want to get with that."

Read more of this story at Slashdot.