Announcing 3 Critical vulns for hundreds of millions of IoT, Firewalls, OT, and Military devices including: Palo Alto Networks, Comcast, D-Link, HP, Canon, Honeywell, GE, Oracle, Siemens, Rockwell, Digi, Lockheed Martin, Boeing... The vulns are with GoAhead Web Server which is a backend library used by these devices. There's a patch available from GoAhead but that doesn't mean there's a patch available for the devices yet -- that's up to the manufacturer. - TLS traffic over DHE ciphers have a 1-byte secret, "04", meaning anyone can decrypt connections to these devices and steal login credentials and session tokens if the client negotiated with DHE ciphers like the latest TLS_DHE_RSA_WITH_CHACHA20_POLY1305_SHA256, which is extremely likely. - LibreSSL mTLS has been completely bypassed, meaning anyone can connect over mTLS. If you have one of these devices listening on the internet and are expecting mTLS to protect it from attackers, take it offline or patch asap. - OpenSSL Certificate Revocation Lists (CRLs) are not enforced, meaning if a user device is stolen or compromised, and you revoke that mTLS cert, nothing actually happens. There are a lot of other attacks this can be used for. These are critical because these types of devices run our world. Water systems, electricity, military, firewalls, critical infrastructure.

I initiated a transfer request from my Earn account to Cash account, but it has been over 24 hours and its still processing. I even made another transfer after that which went through quickly. I contacted customer service but received no response. Can someone help me with that?

i highly doubt that GLM-5.2 was benchmaxxed on PostTrainBench or heavily distilled from Claude models. anyone can inspect the traces ( - the reasoning patterns overall look very reasonable. GLM-5.2 genuinely tries many very sensible approaches (see the screenshot below for everything it tried during a single post-training run on AIME!). - they are very diverse across different seeds, no mode collapse on a single post-training technique. - they are very different from Claude models. - see the thread below for more details. TL;DR: don't blindly trust benchmark *scores*. look at the traces and draw your own conclusions!

The RL framework behind GLM-5.2 is fully open source. The full post-training of GLM-5.2 ran on it in about two days. The same stack sits behind the entire GLM series, from 4.5 to 5.1. It is called slime, and it is built around one idea. Keep a single RL kernel, and push all the variety into data generation. Let me explain what that means. Every RL run has two halves. One generates experience, where the model produces responses and something scores them. The other learns from it by updating weights. The learning half is mechanical. It reads samples, computes a loss, and steps the optimizer, the same way whether the model solves equations or drives a browser. What changes between tasks is generation. A math run answers in a single turn and grades the result. An agent run loops through tool calls, reads results, and only then earns a reward. slime draws the line right there. The learning half stays fixed as one kernel, and everything that differs becomes a new way to generate data. Under the hood, it wires Megatron for training to SGLang for rollout, with a Data Buffer between them that owns prompts, custom data, and generation. Most RL stacks grow into a pile of disconnected trainers, rollout services, and agent frameworks. slime refuses that. Multi-turn tool use, sandbox interaction, environment feedback, and verifier rewards all enter as data generation, not as forks of the loop. So an agentic workload runs on the same loop a math run uses, and the kernel never changes. A few things follow. → It is battle-tested. The loop is validated by shipping real GLM models, and it also supports Qwen3, DeepSeek V3, and Llama 3. → Correctness comes first. RL bugs are silent, so slime keeps the dataflow explicit and treats CI, reproducibility, and fault tolerance as real engineering. The proof is the ecosystem on top of it. Dressage, Miles, vime, Relax, OpenClaw-RL, P1, and TritonForge all build on slime without touching the core loop. The lesson is not that RL needs a bigger framework. It is that the variety belongs in data generation, and the training loop should stay small enough to trust. GitHub repo: (don't forget to star 🌟) Since we're talking about RL, I wrote a full breakdown on fine-tuning LLMs with RL in 2026. Including how to skip manual reward engineering with automatic LLM-graded rewards. The article is quoted below.

How to keep AI spend flat while token usage grows exponentially: Not with friction and spend alerts. With better defaults, routing, and caching. Better Defaults (not Usage Caps) – Engineers can choose any model they want, but defaults matter. We’re experimenting with defaulting to open weight models like GLM 5.2 and Kimi 2.7 through our LLM gateway, while still encouraging engineers to choose the right model for the task. 91% of our employees were never hitting their usage caps, so instead of lowering caps and driving up alerts, we're moving to cheaper defaults. Note that code reviews use a diversity of models, so they can check each other's work. Better Routing – In our custom harnesses, we preprocess prompts and route to the best model for the job, considering cache hits and model pricing. For instance, you may want a frontier model for planning, but not for execution where they can be overkill. Ultimately, humans shouldn't be choosing models - AI can automate this task. Better Caching – Cache misses are the easiest way to drive your cost up. All of our requests are cache aware, so we’re reusing a warm cache wherever possible. For example, our cache hit rate went from 5% → 60% in LibreChat once properly implemented. Keep Context Lean – Start fresh sessions when switching tasks. Scope file context narrowly. Disconnect unused tools. Don't just compact. The goal isn't fewer tokens used, it's fewer tokens wasted. Better Visibility – Our engineers can use as many tokens as they want, from whatever model they want, but we’ve made usage visible – and the more you spend on AI, the more impact we expect. The goal isn't to suppress usage. It's to build the infrastructure that makes exponential growth sustainable. Putting this into practice has cut our AI spend nearly in half, while our token usage continues to grow.