RDW’s online response, after the minister of transport had been questioned in parlement about the matter

Translated section

Each year, the RDW issues approximately 50,000 type approvals for entire vehicles or vehicle components. Driver assistance systems are also vehicle components that we assess. You can find more information about this in our dossier on Type Approvals.

Manufacturers share market-sensitive information with us as part of the type approval process. For this reason, we are not always able to provide substantive information. We understand the interest in this application and maintain the most transparent approach possible within the legal framework of type approval.

It’s an idea used to justify merging xAI (burning through cash) and SpaceX (more profitable*). It’s not remotely practical due to heat dissipation, general complexity, additional cost, and complete inability to service broken components.

We always code in English at work. Using our native language for programming is generally frowned upon.

Network effect / discoverability and free CI time

True, I understand why this is better than all those companies scraping it individually (for both ability to opt out and site load), but the way they handled opt out is still quite silly.

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.

Windows is still good enough for Microsoft to sell licenses, sell services, and other large contracts.

It does not need to be faster, safer, or generally “better” since there is no competition in the traditional sense. Almost everyone is trained to work with Windows and almost all software works on Windows, so it’s just (seen as) a more sensible option for most businesses.

For anyone interested in how they host it for $0.01/day, it’s https://www.nearlyfreespeech.net/

I’ve also lost my Free-Tier resources, I was barely using it too so I can’t imagine it cost much.

I do wonder if this is similar to Mythos, where the company deliberately stokes fears to get people talking about it and spread the assumption that it will actually happen and is a big deal (and to avoid people’s first question about whether it will actually work).

Luckily it probably won’t get made and the company will just rugpull their investors

Would DDR4 or DDR3 be easier to produce?