MAROKO133 Breaking ai: Google Apologizes for Sending the Worst Push Notification You Can P

📌 MAROKO133 Hot ai: Google Apologizes for Sending the Worst Push Notification You

Disaster tends to strike when you let automated systems distribute news, especially on sensitive topics.

The latest case in point: how Google’s automated news alerts accidentally ended up throwing more fuel onto an already hurtful racial slur controversy that unfolded at the BAFTA awards this weekend.

As Deadline reported, Google pushed out a notification linking to an article with the headline, “How the Tourette’s Fallout Unfolded at the BAFTA Film Award.” The problem was the message appended to the notification, which prompted readers to “see more on n****rs.”

The blunder became viral after Instagram influencer Danny Price posted a screenshot of the alert to his followers, calling it “absolutely f**ked.”

“What an interesting Black History month this has turned out to be,” Price wrote.

Google apologized for the slur after the incident gained news coverage.

“We’re very sorry for this mistake. We’ve removed the offensive notification and are working to prevent this from happening again,” a spokesperson told media outlets.

Understandably, the error prompted fiery discussions online about the irresponsibility of allowing AI systems to report and repackage the news. But Google claims that no AI was involved in the blunder.

In a clarification provided by Deadline after it originally reported the notification was AI-generated, Google told the paper that its systems “recognized a euphemism for an offensive term on several web pages, and accidentally applied the offensive term to the notification text.” 

“This system error did not involve AI,” the company emphasized. “Our safety filters did not properly trigger, which is what caused this.”

Nonetheless, the criticisms of AI butting its way into journalism aren’t unwarranted. When Apple launched an AI feature that summarized headlines in 2024, it falsely told users that Luigi Manione had shot himself, and other lies, leading to the BBC filing a formal complaint against the tech giant after the tool repeatedly butchered its stories. Last December, the Washington Post deployed an AI-generated feature for creating personalized podcasts that summarized its stories, which immediately invented and misattributed quotes, among other mistakes.

Google, whose non-chatbot models are notorious for producing outrageous hallucinations, has itself been guilty of similar blunders, too. Last month, its Google Discover feed was caught showing users sensationalized AI-generated headlines that replaced the publication’s original headline, The Verge found.

More on Google: Google’s AI Insists That Next Year Is Not 2027

The post Google Apologizes for Sending the Worst Push Notification You Can Possibly Imagine appeared first on Futurism.

🔗 Sumber: futurism.com

📌 MAROKO133 Breaking ai: Claude Code costs up to $200 a month. Goose does the same

The artificial intelligence coding revolution comes with a catch: it's expensive.

Claude Code, Anthropic's terminal-based AI agent that can write, debug, and deploy code autonomously, has captured the imagination of software developers worldwide. But its pricing — ranging from $20 to $200 per month depending on usage — has sparked a growing rebellion among the very programmers it aims to serve.

Now, a free alternative is gaining traction. Goose, an open-source AI agent developed by Block (the financial technology company formerly known as Square), offers nearly identical functionality to Claude Code but runs entirely on a user's local machine. No subscription fees. No cloud dependency. No rate limits that reset every five hours.

"Your data stays with you, period," said Parth Sareen, a software engineer who demonstrated the tool during a recent livestream. The comment captures the core appeal: Goose gives developers complete control over their AI-powered workflow, including the ability to work offline — even on an airplane.

The project has exploded in popularity. Goose now boasts more than 26,100 stars on GitHub, the code-sharing platform, with 362 contributors and 102 releases since its launch. The latest version, 1.20.1, shipped on January 19, 2026, reflecting a development pace that rivals commercial products.

For developers frustrated by Claude Code's pricing structure and usage caps, Goose represents something increasingly rare in the AI industry: a genuinely free, no-strings-attached option for serious work.

Anthropic's new rate limits spark a developer revolt

To understand why Goose matters, you need to understand the Claude Code pricing controversy.

Anthropic, the San Francisco artificial intelligence company founded by former OpenAI executives, offers Claude Code as part of its subscription tiers. The free plan provides no access whatsoever. The Pro plan, at $17 per month with annual billing (or $20 monthly), limits users to just 10 to 40 prompts every five hours — a constraint that serious developers exhaust within minutes of intensive work.

The Max plans, at $100 and $200 per month, offer more headroom: 50 to 200 prompts and 200 to 800 prompts respectively, plus access to Anthropic's most powerful model, Claude 4.5 Opus. But even these premium tiers come with restrictions that have inflamed the developer community.

In late July, Anthropic announced new weekly rate limits. Under the system, Pro users receive 40 to 80 hours of Sonnet 4 usage per week. Max users at the $200 tier get 240 to 480 hours of Sonnet 4, plus 24 to 40 hours of Opus 4. Nearly five months later, the frustration has not subsided.

The problem? Those "hours" are not actual hours. They represent token-based limits that vary wildly depending on codebase size, conversation length, and the complexity of the code being processed. Independent analysis suggests the actual per-session limits translate to roughly 44,000 tokens for Pro users and 220,000 tokens for the $200 Max plan.

"It's confusing and vague," one developer wrote in a widely shared analysis. "When they say '24-40 hours of Opus 4,' that doesn't really tell you anything useful about what you're actually getting."

The backlash on Reddit and developer forums has been fierce. Some users report hitting their daily limits within 30 minutes of intensive coding. Others have canceled their subscriptions entirely, calling the new restrictions "a joke" and "unusable for real work."

Anthropic has defended the changes, stating that the limits affect fewer than five percent of users and target people running Claude Code "continuously in the background, 24/7." But the company has not clarified whether that figure refers to five percent of Max subscribers or five percent of all users — a distinction that matters enormously.

How Block built a free AI coding agent that works offline

Goose takes a radically different approach to the same problem.

Built by Block, the payments company led by Jack Dorsey, Goose is what engineers call an "on-machine AI agent." Unlike Claude Code, which sends your queries to Anthropic's servers for processing, Goose can run entirely on your local computer using open-source language models that you download and control yourself.

The project's documentation describes it as going "beyond code suggestions" to "install, execute, edit, and test with any LLM." That last phrase — "any LLM" — is the key differentiator. Goose is model-agnostic by design.

You can connect Goose to Anthropic's Claude models if you have API access. You can use OpenAI's GPT-5 or Google's Gemini. You can route it through services like Groq or OpenRouter. Or — and this is where things get interesting — you can run it entirely locally using tools like Ollama, which let you download and execute open-source models on your own hardware.

The practical implications are significant. With a local setup, there are no subscription fees, no usage caps, no rate limits, and no concerns about your code being sent to external servers. Your conversations with the AI never leave your machine.

"I use Ollama all the time on planes — it's a lot of fun!" Sareen noted during a demonstration, highlighting how local models free developers from the constraints of internet connectivity.

What Goose can do that traditional code assistants can't

Goose operates as a command-line tool or desktop application that can autonomously perform complex development tasks. It can build entire projects from scratch, write and execute code, debug failures, orchestrate workflows across multiple files, and interact with external APIs — all without constant human oversight.

The architecture relies on what the AI industry calls "tool calling" or "<a href="https://platform.openai…

Konten dipersingkat otomatis.

🔗 Sumber: venturebeat.com