Explore
Latest AI news, model releases, research and developer updates.
554 results • Page 19 of 47
I watched a new tool try to get around the model safeguards of four major frontier companies. You might be surprised by how they performed.
In an interview with our friend Joanna Stern on her YouTube channel, OpenAI president Greg Brockman said the company is working on a "family of devices" for interacting with its AI models. However, Brockman didn't confirm reports that one of those devices is a smart speaker OpenAI's rumored to be launching in 2027, or earlier […]
Nimble , a New York City-based tech startup VentureBeat previously covered for its efforts to re-invent web search for enterprises by using multiple AI agents to improve accuracy and depth, is taking another step toward its vision of a world in which agents do most of the web searching instead of us typing and reviewing the results manually. Nimble today launched Web Search Agents , a new retrieval system designed to help AI agents perform more 21% more accurate web research while using significantly fewer tokens — 51% less compared with leading AI search alternatives on comparable, according to the firm. While Nimble did not disclose its specific benchmarking methodology or competitors evaluated, the results underscore a growing trend in enterprise AI: optimizing retrieval has become as important as improving the underlying language models themselves. Nimble's leadership says the product combines self-learning retrieval strategies, proprietary web indexes, and live web access to deliver domain-specific search capabilities that outperform general-purpose web search services for enterprise workloads. "Our research team built self-learning retrieval algorithms that learn a customer's domain," said Nimble CEO and co-founder Uri Knorovich in an interview with VentureBeat. "They find the exact information more efficiently, reduce the amount of multi-hop reasoning required, and lower token usage while improving accuracy." Rather than positioning itself as another general search engine, Nimble is targeting developers building autonomous agents that require continuously updated information from the public web for research, lead generation, competitive intelligence, compliance, and other business-critical workflows. It's also designed to slot in seamlessly to an enterprise's existing systems and workflows. "You can run the agent directly through the Nimble API with zero infrastructure," Knorovich said. "For large enterprises, we're partnering with Microsoft, Oracle, Snowflake, and others so customers can deploy these agent systems inside their own infrastructure." How does it work and stack up to other, existing AI-powered search and agentic systems? Read on to find out. Moving beyond generic AI web search into specialized search agents that fit your enterprise's needs Most AI applications today rely on general-purpose search application programming interfaces (APIs) for search engines and public knowledge bases that return broad collections of files, leaving the language model responsible for determining which sources are relevant. That process often requires multiple retrieval steps, additional reasoning, and significant token expenditure before an agent produces an answer. This is obviously inefficient and raises the cost spent to run AI search looking through irrelevant sources. Nimble argues that before long, every enterprise will need its own methods for searching, retrieving, and validating external information since each enterprise relies on its own distinct preferred sources, signals, and standards of trust. As such, instead of applying one search strategy to every workload, Nimble's Web Search Agents are designed to learn the characteristics of a specific domain and adapt how information is retrieved, providing agents with structured, relevant context rather than forcing them to sift through large amounts of generic search results. "Instead of one generic retrieval model, we build specialized retrieval models for each customer's domain, making them faster, cheaper, and more accurate," Knorovich explained. "A single enterprise can run hundreds of different agents. Each one has its own domain expertise, guardrails, goals, and search algorithm. The optimization starts with the second search, without requiring any setup from the customer." Its goal is not only to reduce redundant retrieval, but also to shorten multi-step research paths and avoid repeatedly sending raw pages through a language model for parsing, resulting in the 51% reduced token figure the company cites. The distinction is particularly relevant for long-running enterprise agents performing research over hours or days rather than answering simple consumer questions. In those scenarios, reducing unnecessary tool calls can significantly lower operating costs while improving answer consistency. That emphasis reflects a broader shift occurring across the AI tooling ecosystem. As foundation models become increasingly capable, infrastructure vendors are competing on everything surrounding the model—including retrieval, orchestration, memory, observability, and governance. Optimizing retrieval for production AI The launch builds on Nimble’s broader strategy of becoming an enterprise web intelligence platform rather than simply a web scraping provider. Earlier this year, the company introduced its broader Agentic Search Platform following a $47 million Series B financing , positioning itself as infrastructure that transforms the live web into structured, machine-readable data for AI systems. The company’s latest release extends that vision with a concept it calls “Harness as a Tool,” which powers its new domain-specialized Web Search Agents. Rather than requiring engineering teams to assemble separate search APIs, browser automation, extraction pipelines, validation logic, memory systems, and orchestration code, Nimble packages those capabilities behind a managed interface. The harness can determine what to search, navigate pages when conventional indexes are insufficient, extract relevant information, validate the results, and return the final context in a form designed for downstream agents. Nimble also says the system retains domain-specific memory and builds proprietary indexes that improve as customers run more searches. "The biggest research breakthrough is adding semantic memory and a caching layer to the agent," Knorovich told VentureBeat. "The agent learns usage patterns and domain expertise over time, so every subsequent search becomes faster and more efficient." As for what domains Nimble can tackle, the company says it can address virtually any knowledge work domain. "We've seen customers build investment banking analysts, competitive intelligence agents for product managers, go-to-market research agents, newsroom monitoring, insurance applications, life sciences research, and supply chain optimization," Knorovich said. "Our customers surprise us every day with new agent use cases." However, for enterprises concerned about data privacy and retention, Knorovich assured VentureBeat that: "Nimble is zero-data-retention by design. Customer queries are never stored in our environment, and when customers deploy semantic memory and self-learning models, that knowledge stays in their own tenant—not ours." Customer deployments point to operational gains Nimble supported the announcement with early customer examples from AI-native software vendors and enterprise users. AI-native CRM company Rox reported achieving a 20× reduction in token costs after adopting Nimble’s retrieval infrastructure while simultaneously improving the quality and completeness of information available to its AI agents. Although the company did not disclose detailed workload measurements or a reproducible baseline, the example illustrates the operational savings retrieval optimization can provide for high-volume agent deployments. Nimble says its infrastructure currently supports more than 90 million searches each day across Fortune 500 enterprises and AI-native companies operating mission-critical workflows where accuracy, completeness, and enterprise control are essential. API, SDK and MCP support target AI builders The platform is immediately available through an API, SDK, and Model Context Protocol (MCP) integration, allowing developers to connect Nimble directly into AI agents regardless of the orchestration framework they use. Developers can use the platform for several categories of web intelligence, including: Low-latency live web search Deep multi-step web research Web crawling Structured dataset generation Domain-specific information retrieval The company also provides documentation and pre-built agents for common web extraction tasks while allowing developers to build custom retrieval agents using natural-language descriptions instead of manually maintaining scraping logic. Nimble is offering two notably different consumption models. Developers can begin with a pay-as-you-go Agent API priced from $0.025 per Web Search Agent request at the listed low-effort setting. Companies that want Nimble to configure and manage custom data delivery can instead buy annual managed plans beginning at $2,500 per month. Where Nimble fits in the emerging agentic search stack Nimble enters a market that has rapidly expanded beyond traditional web search into autonomous research agents capable of planning, browsing, reasoning, and synthesizing information. Products such as ChatGPT Deep Research , Google Gemini Deep Research , Alibaba’s Tongyi DeepResearch , Perplexity , and Sakana Marlin all seek to automate knowledge work that previously required hours—or, in Marlin’s case, potentially weeks—of human research. Rather than competing head-to-head as another end-user research assistant, however, Nimble is positioning itself one layer lower in the AI stack—as the web intelligence infrastructure that powers those agents or custom enterprise applications built on leading foundation models. That distinction reflects an increasingly important architectural shift in enterprise AI. Most “Deep Research” systems optimize the overall research workflow, generating search plans, iteratively gathering information, and producing synthesized reports. Nimble instead argues that the retrieval layer itself has become the primary bottleneck for enterprise AI deployments. If an agent retrieves too many irrelevant pages or performs unnecessary search iterations, token consumption, latency, and operating costs all increase before the model even begins its main reasoning process. "Customers across life sciences, insurance, healthcare, pharma, retail, and digital-native companies are all telling us the same thing: we need to feed our agents with more accurate context, and we need to reduce the amount of tokens every task consumes," Knorovich said. The launch blog makes that argument more concrete by describing how teams frequently rebuild the same retrieval stack themselves. A production agent may start with a search API, then accumulate browser controls, parsers, extraction components, validation steps, memory, caching, evaluations, and custom workflow logic. Nimble is positioning its harness as a managed alternative to that growing engineering burden. In Nimble’s view, improving retrieval before reasoning begins is more valuable than simply giving a language model more documents to analyze. The company’s Web Search Agents therefore adapt retrieval strategies to a particular workload, combining proprietary indexes with real-time web retrieval and task-specific search policies rather than applying the same search algorithm across every domain. That makes Nimble less of a direct competitor to OpenAI’s or Google’s research assistants than to developer-focused retrieval infrastructure such as Exa and Tavily. Those platforms also provide AI-native search APIs and research capabilities, but Nimble differentiates itself by emphasizing self-learning retrieval strategies, proprietary indexing, enterprise governance, managed delivery, and token efficiency for production agents. For organizations building their own AI systems, the distinction could become increasingly important. Foundation models are becoming more capable across the industry, shifting competitive differentiation toward the infrastructure surrounding them—including retrieval, orchestration, memory, observability, and governance. Nimble’s strategy reflects that broader trend, betting that better web intelligence can deliver larger operational gains than incremental improvements in model reasoning alone. Enterprise infrastructure versus AI research assistants The different positioning is also reflected in pricing.While consumer-facing AI research assistants are generally sold as productivity subscriptions for individual users or teams, Nimble is pricing its managed service as enterprise infrastructure designed to power production applications. Its pay-as-you-go API, however, gives developers a lower-cost path to test the underlying agent technology before committing to a managed deployment. Platform Primary audience Primary focus Lowest publicly available price (USD) Nimble Developers and enterprises Managed web retrieval and orchestration infrastructure combining specialized search, browsing, extraction, validation, proprietary indexing, and memory $0.025 per Agent API request (low-effort setting). Managed service starts at $2,500/month (Startup plan, billed annually). ChatGPT Deep Research Professionals, enterprises, and knowledge workers Autonomous multi-step research with iterative browsing, synthesis, and citations $20/month (ChatGPT Plus). Higher limits are available with Pro, Team, Enterprise, and Edu plans. Google Gemini Deep Research Consumers and enterprises Research planning integrated with Gemini, Google Search, and Google's productivity ecosystem $19.99/month (Google AI Pro, U.S.). Higher-capacity AI Ultra and enterprise Workspace offerings are also available. Tongyi DeepResearch Developers and AI researchers Open research model for long-horizon information-seeking and agentic search Free (open source). Users are responsible for their own infrastructure and cloud compute costs. Perplexity Consumers, professionals, and enterprise teams AI-powered web search and cited research Free entry tier. Perplexity Pro starts at $20/month with Enterprise Pro available separately. Exa Developers and AI platform builders AI-native search, content retrieval, and asynchronous research agents Free developer tier (includes monthly credits). Paid Search API pricing starts at approximately $7 per 1,000 requests while Agent runs range from $0.012 to $1.00 per run depending on effort level. Tavily Developers building AI agents Search, extraction, crawling, and research APIs for agents and RAG workflows Free developer tier (1,000 monthly credits). Pay-as-you-go usage starts at approximately $ 0.008 per credit. Sakana Marlin Enterprises, strategy teams, financial institutions, and research organizations Ultra Deep Research for hours-long strategic reasoning and executive-grade reports Pay-as-you-go from approximately $0.61 per credit (¥98/credit) with with 100 credits required per research run (approx $61 per run). The first subscription tier is Pro at approximately $936/month (¥150,000/month) followed by Team at approximately $2,495/month (¥400,000/month) with Enterprise pricing available by quote. The comparison reveals three increasingly distinct markets. ChatGPT Deep Research, Gemini Deep Research, and Perplexity operate primarily as user-facing research assistants. Exa and Tavily provide developer-facing retrieval and research APIs. Nimble and Sakana Marlin occupy more enterprise-oriented territory, but at different layers: Nimble supplies retrieval infrastructure, while Marlin performs long-horizon strategic analysis. Sakana Marlin is particularly useful as a counterpoint. It is positioned as a "Virtual CSO" rather than a search API, running autonomous research loops for as long as eight hours and producing executive-ready reports, references, and supporting materials. Nimble, by contrast, is designed to sit beneath those kinds of systems, supplying the specialized retrieval, browsing, extraction, validation, and orchestration that enterprise agents need to gather reliable external information before reasoning begins. The comparison therefore should not be read as a direct price-to-price evaluation. A $20/month ChatGPT Plus or $19.99/month Google AI Pro subscription buys an individual AI workspace with Deep Research capabilities. Nimble's $2,500/month managed plan funds concurrent production agents, managed ETL, MCP integration, web-page capacity, storage, and hands-free data delivery. Sakana Marlin's approximately $936/month (¥150,000/month) Pro plan pays for extended, compute-intensive strategic research workflows. Each price reflects a fundamentally different product boundary and deployment model rather than simply a different level of AI capability. Why retrieval is becoming the next AI battleground As enterprise AI systems mature, the industry is increasingly recognizing that model quality alone does not determine application performance. Large language models frequently fail not because they cannot reason, but because they lack timely, trustworthy external information. That reality has fueled rapid investment across retrieval-augmented generation, AI-native search, web intelligence platforms, knowledge graphs, browser automation, and agent infrastructure. Nimble’s launch reflects this evolution by focusing less on building another frontier model and more on improving the quality of information flowing into existing ones. Whether the company’s reported 21-point improvement in answer quality and 51% reduction in token usage hold up across a broad range of enterprise deployments remains to be independently validated. The larger strategic bet is that, as frontier models become more interchangeable, companies will differentiate themselves through the data, retrieval policies, trusted-source rules, memory systems, and orchestration layers surrounding those models. Nimble is not trying to build the researcher that sits in front of the user. It is trying to become part of the infrastructure that determines what the researcher can find, how efficiently it can find it, and whether the resulting evidence is complete enough to support production decisions. Web Search Agents are available through Nimble’s API, SDK, and MCP integrations, with a free trial available for developers evaluating the platform.
Target SVP Siobhán Mc Feeney says the AI models her company runs aren't what gives Target its edge — everything built around them is. "There's a lot in it. That to us is the moat," Mc Feeney said at VB Transform 2026 . "The models are great, and they're important. They're just not sufficient to be the competitive advantage." That discipline shows up early in how Target decides whether to build an agent at all. Mc Feeney was blunt, even "controversial" by her own admission, about the current AI moment: every enterprise wants AI agents, but not everything needs one, she said. Agents earn their autonomy over time rather than getting it by default, she said — a principle that runs through everything Target has built around them. Mc Feeney said the goal is to make sure agents are aimed at the problems that drive the most value for Target's guests. “We want to make sure we're investing in the right places," she said. Being deliberate about agents Agents are becoming part of Target's underlying architecture, increasingly connecting signals, systems, and decisions across supply chain, replenishment, and demand forecasting. Mc Feeney framed it as retail's oldest promise — the right product, in the right place, at the right time — delivered at scale. But her team has been deliberate about building AI agents, beginning with the simplest, most obvious question: What is the problem they’re trying to solve? This leads to several follow-on questions: Does that problem need an agent? If it does, what type of agent? An orchestrator? A super agent? A domain-specific agent? Or is what you're calling an "agent" actually just a tool? “You define that upfront, and this may sound a little process-heavy, then you have to register and certify your agent,” Mc Feeney said. Because a solution may already exist, and you don’t want to duplicate work. Agent design kicks off another series of important questions: What triggers an agent to act? Automation? An engineer? A timer? What needs to be put in place to track that? "We're trying to make sure we have lineage from the very beginning — the birthing of this agent, all the way through — because at 2 a.m. one morning, when something goes sideways, we want to make sure we understand everything that happened," Mc Feeney said. Autonomy level is another consideration; new agents typically start with base autonomy and earn more over time. What the agent has access to is a separate question: what data, what systems, what tables, what databases? Finally, there’s monitoring and observability; agents won’t solve problems, or improve over time, if they’re not continuously evaluated. “We measure everything: What it was intended to do, its calibration, its trajectory, not just runtime and latency,” Mc Feeney said. This creates full transparency, and allows agents to be tweaked over time. “You're talking about architecture and taxonomy and a data governance layer that absolutely had to be established,” she said. There's a lot in these "layers of autonomy" — that foundation is what gives Target the ability to scale and properly invest in the right models for the right problem. Models have different “gradients” that are better for different jobs; for instance, frontier models excel at complex tasks that require crunching billions of pieces of data (like in heavy merchandising supply chains). But in some scenarios they can be cost-prohibitive. “So it’s making sure there's always a cost benefit,” Mc Feeney said. Agents must earn their autonomy A digital-twin simulation predicted men's shorts inventory across three Target stores in Long Beach this summer — and one store came back needing six to seven times more stock than the others, she said. Inventory analysts' first reaction: That can't be right. But the system had found something they hadn't factored in. That store sat less than two miles from the beach; the other two were 10 to 12 miles inland. Analysts let the recommendation stand, and the stock sold through. "This is science. This is mathematically more significant and more confidence-filling than humans doing it," Mc Feeney said. Results like that are what let Target's agentic systems earn more autonomy over time, she said. Target looks at AI agent autonomy as "earned" and structures it as a four-level ladder, Mc Feeney said: agents start by making observations without acting, then move to suggesting actions while waiting for approval, then to acting within defined guardrails. At the highest level Target currently operates, agents run end-to-end — but still with a human in the loop. “The autonomy levels for the agents are super important,” Mc Feeney said. “They earn them, and they can lose them if they don't perform as expected.” Models that drift will be taken out of service. As she put it, humans earn autonomy when we prove we can do something over time. Nobody is given a bunch of extra responsibilities just because; they have to have shown they’re able to handle them. In a similar way, agents can be scientifically measured and quantified: how accurate they were, how much they drifted, and how close they came to their intended goal. This helps establish guardrails, allowing builders to work faster, and “go fast forever,” because they're not constantly wondering where the guardrails are. “If you follow these guardrails, you [follow] security guidelines, you register the agent, and something still goes wrong, we have full lineage all the way through from the start,” Mc Feeney said. “Our ability to recover is much better.” When it comes down to it, agent success is a confluence of factors, not just one, she said: “It's about your architecture. It's about your taxonomy. It's about the autonomy levels your agents have, and it's about security and observability.” A new skill set for new workflows Even when agent autonomy is high, though, builders must still be held accountable when something goes wrong. Mc Feeney noted that teams are now working at speeds no one could have anticipated, which means evaluation harnesses have to be established and agents registered and tracked. A lot of it is cultural; the workforce is being reshaped and builders and engineers need new skills to manage human workers and AI systems side by side. These contexts are quite different, but the career evolution is “super exciting.” “You're a builder. You're observing agents building, and you're also coaching humans observing agents building,” Mc Feeney said. “The level of nuance is pretty special.”
Cybersecurity researchers have flagged a maximum-severity security flaw in Ruflo, an open-source agent meta-harness for Anthropic Claude Code and OpenAI Codex, that could result in unauthenticated remote code execution. The vulnerability, tracked as CVE-2026-59726 (CVSS score: 10.0), impacts all versions of the project before version 3.16.3. It has been codenamed RufRoot by Noma Security's
Polar has come out with an AI-first browser aimed at knowledge workers, and it has now raised a $5.7 million seed round led by Madrona.
The startup analyzes calls, messages, and CRM data to identify effective sales techniques and turn them into playbooks for AI agents.
AI is fantastic at spotting patterns, but human insight is the key.
380 points 293 comments on Hacker News · enklypesalt.com
Deciding what's real on the Internet won't be easy in the future.
Pangram has raised $9 million to scale its AI detection software. The startup has also released a new AI text detection model, Pangram 4, and an AI image detection model in research preview.
Novelists, journalists, and power LinkedIn posters are embracing first-person narratives and idiosyncrasies to avoid being mistaken for chat bots.
