BTC $71,489.91 -4.15%
ETH $2,015.59 -2.99%
BNB $655.75 -4.46%
XRP $1.03 -2.48%
SOL $81.43 -4.02%
TRX $0.3153 -0.65%
DOGE $0.0659 -3.79%
ADA $0.1726 -2.64%
BCH $225.64 -2.52%
LINK $10.06 -3.25%
HYPE $71.76 -1.78%
AAVE $114.11 -7.12%
SUI $0.8028 -4.21%
XLM $0.1495 -0.23%
ZEC $953.77 -4.06%
AAPL $355.10 -0.11%
AMZN $267.72 +0.60%
GOOGL $299.02 +1.89%
MSFT $523.23 +0.52%
META $624.69 -0.89%
NVDA $166.26 -4.62%
TSLA $397.87 +1.79%
SNDK $938.05 -4.56%
INTC $61.36 -1.97%
SPCX $140.11 -0.06%
MU $801.07 -1.60%
AMD $585.11 +5.74%
BTC $71,489.91 -4.15%
ETH $2,015.59 -2.99%
BNB $655.75 -4.46%
XRP $1.03 -2.48%
SOL $81.43 -4.02%
TRX $0.3153 -0.65%
DOGE $0.0659 -3.79%
ADA $0.1726 -2.64%
BCH $225.64 -2.52%
LINK $10.06 -3.25%
HYPE $71.76 -1.78%
AAVE $114.11 -7.12%
SUI $0.8028 -4.21%
XLM $0.1495 -0.23%
ZEC $953.77 -4.06%
AAPL $355.10 -0.11%
AMZN $267.72 +0.60%
GOOGL $299.02 +1.89%
MSFT $523.23 +0.52%
META $624.69 -0.89%
NVDA $166.26 -4.62%
TSLA $397.87 +1.79%
SNDK $938.05 -4.56%
INTC $61.36 -1.97%
SPCX $140.11 -0.06%
MU $801.07 -1.60%
AMD $585.11 +5.74%

developer

All
Article
Flash

The pass rate and cost of Alma by independent developer Yetone are better than Claude Code

The locally developed AI Agent Alma, led by independent developer Yetone, ranked third in the latest round of cross-evaluation initiated by the AI Agent infrastructure company Runta, both in task success rate and cost of success, outperforming tools like Claude Code and OpenCode. The current leaderboard snapshot shows that Alma has a task success rate of 72.7%, just behind Codex CLI at 77.9% and Pi at 72.8%, while Claude Code stands at 70.0%.Alma costs approximately $0.80 on average for each successfully completed task, compared to Claude Code's $0.94, making it about 16% cheaper. This FrontierHarness v1.1 comparison evaluates the performance of the same large model under different Agent execution frameworks, covering 21 sets of Harness configurations, 5 large models, and 62 tasks, with each task repeated 4 times, planning to run a total of 26,040 times, which is 72 times the scale of the previous version. All tools operate in a unified cloud environment, comparing task success rates, token costs, and execution speeds.Alma emphasizes local operation and long-term memory, capable of reading and modifying code, executing terminal commands, searching the web, and supporting Skills and MCP, while also allowing for switching underlying models. Recently, Alma integrated with Herdr, allowing programming Agents like Claude Code, Codex, and Pi to continue operating within Herdr, and enabling users to view execution processes, respond to questions, and approve operations in a centralized chat interface. Users can also remotely manage multiple Agents on their computers via iPhone. The evaluation is still ongoing, and rankings may change; the models being tested are limited to open-source models like GLM, DeepSeek, Kimi, and Muse, and do not cover closed-source models from the GPT and Claude series.

Developers say that the subscription limit for Fable 5.2 is about one-fifth of Opus

Renowned developer and T3 Code founder Theo discovered that although Anthropic's newly released Fable 5.2 is more powerful, the API equivalent usage available to subscription users is significantly lower. Theo has been tracking the actual request data of Claude Code for a long time. According to his estimates, for the same monthly subscription fee of $200 for Claude Ultra, using Opus 5.5 would yield an API usage equivalent to about $15,000 per month; switching to Fable 5.2 would only provide about $3,000, a difference of nearly 5 times.Anthropic stipulates that Ultra users can use a maximum of 50% of their total quota for Fable each week. Even if the entire quota is not used, as long as Fable reaches its limit, users must switch to other models or pay extra to continue using it. Theo estimates that if Opus 5.5 is used fully in a week, approximately 1,200 interaction rounds and 230 task sessions can be completed. If the Fable quota is exhausted first and then switched to Opus, the total number of interaction rounds would drop to about 900, although the number of completed task sessions might be slightly higher since Fable can sometimes complete tasks in one go without repeated communication.The API unit price of Fable 5.2 has decreased by 20% compared to the previous generation, with input and output tokens costing $8 and $40 per million, respectively, but it is still twice that of Opus 5.5. Anthropic reminds users that Fable will consume subscription quotas faster than other Claude models. Currently, Anthropic is offering eligible subscription users 1 to 3 opportunities to reset their Fable quota, with the number of resets depending on the subscription duration. Each reset can return the Fable quota consumed in the current week, allowing users to continue using it without waiting until the next week.

Developers say that the Binance hacker may have made a mistake and could potentially be located through MetaMask IP

Smart contract developer Justin Kalland posted on X, indicating that the Binance hacker may have made a potential mistake, and MetaMask should retain any Web2 logs it can access as much as possible. He stated that the hacker sent 175 million USDT to a new wallet, and about 2.5 minutes later, that wallet received 2 ETH, likely used to pay for gas fees, which aligns with the usage pattern of other attack wallets.Kalland noted that exactly two minutes later, the wallet used MetaMask's Gas Station service, even though there were already gas fees at that time. Three consecutive transactions appeared in the same block, including an ETH deposit from the Gas Station, an unlimited USDT authorization to the Kyber Network router, and a payment of 127.67 USDT to the Gas Station. The amount of this ETH deposit perfectly matched the maximum gas budget after combining the Kyber authorization and USDT payment, down to the wei.Kalland stated that the ETH held by the wallet at that time was sufficient to cover the aforementioned fees, reasonably inferring that the user was using the MetaMask wallet and mistakenly selected USDT to pay for gas fees due to haste. Using the MetaMask Gas Station requires going through MetaMask Sentinel, and the transaction is broadcasted by it rather than through conventional RPC, meaning that related interactions likely left off-chain records that may contain IP metadata. Among the checked attacker wallets, this is the only one that showed the use of the Gas Station, with the address 0xAa246BF639586a6Ba46762D378CE50cA4fc654a0.

XRP Ledger developers test a zero-balance account creation plan, which is proposed to be funded by the sponsor to cover the 1 XRP reserve requirement

According to CoinDesk, XRP Ledger developers are testing a new feature that aims to allow the creation of blockchain accounts with an initial balance of zero, with existing accounts bearing the reserve required for new accounts, thereby lowering the financial threshold for payment applications and automated software to create wallets on a large scale. This proposal was submitted on October 15 in the form of a SponsoredAccountCreate transaction proposal.According to current XRP Ledger rules, each account must reserve at least 1 XRP as a reserve, meaning that creating 100,000 independent accounts would require locking up 100,000 XRP. The new proposal intends for sponsored accounts to bear this reserve requirement, and a broader fee sponsorship mechanism in the future could also allow applications to pay transaction fees on behalf of users, but the overall reserve requirement for the network will not be eliminated. This feature is expected to lower the usage threshold for scenarios such as embedded wallets, RLUSD stablecoin payments, and AI agent automated payments.However, the related code is still under review, and the sponsorship mechanism it relies on has not yet gone live on the mainnet. As of October 19, the mechanism has only received 11 votes out of the 35 required validator votes, still falling short of the 29 votes needed for approval.
app_icon
ChainCatcher Building the Web3 world with innovations.