6 ms·
After dissing Anthropic for limiting Mythos, OpenAI restricts access to Cyber
- nsxwolf 5mo agoCodex has been infuriating me by demanding I sign up for the cyber program if I want to continue, when I'm not even asking security questions.
- 2ndorderthought 5mo ago"my model is the most dangerous" "No mine is the most dangerous" "Nuh uh mine is" "Mine could kill everyone!" "Mine could do it faster!" "Prove it!!!" This is where we are
- davidgrenier 5mo agoYeah I guess two companies who would otherwise be considered going for bankruptcy have models too expensive to run. As they don't see themselves making money any time soon, they have to turn every future model into a weird fascination.
- redsocksfan45 5mo ago[dead]
- cyanydeez 5mo agothink about it in the form of who can pay. theyre at b2b. and swiftly moving to government.
- 2ndorderthought 5mo agoAll that user data is a huge asset for government contracts.
- DivingForGold 5mo agoChina’s DeepSeek prices new V4 AI model at 97% below OpenAI’s GPT-5.5 Did somebody say that Elon is stealthly funding: Seven lawsuits filed against OpenAI by families of Canada mass-shooting victims As always, when the going get's tough, the tough ultimately resort to lawsuits.
- VorpalWay 5mo agoIf the difference is that large, it seems plausible to me that the Chinese models are subsidized in order to gain market share, this is not exactly the first time the Chinese government has done so (or at least been rumoured to have done so). You should assume that everyone has a hidden agenda when money is involved.
- joe_mamba 5mo ago> it seems plausible to me that the Chinese models are subsidized in order to gain market share In this case, this point is kinda moot since the entire US and SV tech ecosystem, has been subsidized first by the US defense industry during the cold war, and after by the US government funded VCs by its unique cheat-code ability to infinitely print the world reserve currency with little to no inflation consequences upon its own economy, and dump it on its tech sector or on the free market to buy foreign competitors before they become a challenge, in order to be ahead of everyone else. Given this, I find criticisms of China's state subsidize to pale in comparison, when we talk about what is "fair".
- VorpalWay 5mo agoAbsolutely a fair point. And I wrote: > You should assume that everyone has a hidden agenda when money is involved. As an European there is little difference between what US is doing and China is doing when it comes to tactics. The particulars may differ, the end result is similar. Traditionally I could at least say that US was more democratic and as such was preferable, but that argument seems to be gradually weakening.
- wirybeige 5mo ago
- throwyawayyyy 5mo agoThere's a story to tell in that: 1) Google has a transformer-based AI that hallucinates too much to release 2) OpenAI replicates the tech then YOLOs it 3) Everyone says: look how Google is getting left behind! Google thinks: the second mouse gets the cheese. 4) Google gets the cheese, OpenAI is absorbed by Microsoft or just disappears (or both).
- JeremyNT 5mo agoCertainly could turn out that way. TPUs were their real moat. All that capacity used throughout their suite of products on non-chatbot features, ready to rip for consumers once soon as somebody else opened the floodgates to the public. Now all their competitors lose money on every token paying their cloud providers (of course it's funny money, maybe they're just giving the cloud providers equity) while Google is sitting calmly over there, actually owning everything they need for any eventuality, and beholden to nobody.
- alfiedotwtf 5mo agoAre TPUs that much faster than GPUs? Sorry, I’ve been totally sleeping on TPUs
- alfiedotwtf 5mo agoThey could easily branch out paid for vanity products like “personalised models” that tell the user whatever they want to hear
- brikym 5mo agoIt's like that phone call in The Big Short where Goldman suddenly change their mind once they hold a position.
- vasco 5mo agoWould AGI start by hacking competing labs to hamper their progress?
- Avicebron 5mo agoYou'll have to define what you mean by AGI
- fodkodrasz 5mo agoAGI: Automatically Generating Income
- gordonhart 5mo agoThis is a surprisingly concrete and defensible definition of AGI.
- Avicebron 5mo agoIs it defensible? It sounds like a thin disguise over "income for me but not for thee"?
- redsocksfan45 5mo ago[dead]
- red-iron-pine 5mo agothat's just capitalism
- cdrnsf 5mo agoNo, because AGI is a fantasy.
- concinds 5mo agoThese models demonstrably have good vulnerability research capabilities. I'm sure their marketing department is ecstatic but you guys are far more hype-based than what you're calling out.
- ZyanWu 5mo ago> demonstrably I'm not entirely up to date on each week's LLM hype train/scandal but last I heard there was no public access to it or public-trusted 3rd parties that can review model's capabilities
- 2ndorderthought 5mo agoYou are up to date. Mythos had unauthorized access because of poor security but that's it as far as I know. Not exactly a good sign for something being advertised as a weapon...
- saghm 5mo agoYou'd think if Mythos was so good at finding security issues they could point it at their own setup for it and have found those issues easily...
- SpicyLemonZest 5mo agoIt’s easy to end up with no public-trusted third parties if we arbitrarily distrust third parties who say the capabilities match what’s promised. Mozilla for example says it found hundreds of Firefox vulnerabilities, and I think it’s pretty unlikely they’re lying to cover Anthropic’s back.
- calgoo 5mo agoI think the question around the Firefox find, is not that they found hundreds of vulnerabilities - they found hundreds of bugs. What would be really interesting is a side by side Claude Opus 4.7 and Mythos comparison.
- 5mo ago
- boringg 5mo agoMarketing stunts. The equivalent of holding a line outside a popular bar.
- basisword 5mo agoGiven the USG has asked Anthropic not to release Mythos I'd wager it's more than a marketing stunt.
- boringg 5mo agoIt can be both and I don't know how much I would trust the USG as the canary in the coal mine given their technical readiness typically seems low across most institutions in that they are probably more exposed because they haven't shored up their systems.
- noosphr 5mo agoRemember that they have been saying that since gpt2. I didn't think crying could be such a successful business model.
- lesuorac 5mo agoIt's just "thinking past the sale" which they've been doing forever. i.e. "I'm so worried that our capped for-profit structure will limit your returns when we make over 1 Trillion in profit".
- neuronexmachina 5mo agoPeople keep on mentioning gpt2, but it's worth recalling that back in 2019 it was basically the first model that was capable of zero-shot generation of coherent multi-paragraph text. Having it write security exploits like Mythos wasn't even on the radar. Rather, the concerns were about misuse and societal implications, which in retrospect were pretty prescient: https://openai.com/index/gpt-2-6-month-follow-up/ https://openai.com/index/gpt-2-6-month-follow-up/
- shepherdjerred 5mo agoAlso Open AI/ Sam admit that the concerns were quite silly in retrospect
- cedws 5mo agoCan't wait for the Chinese models to completely wipe the floor with them in 6 months.
- dk970 5mo ago[dead]
- peddling-brink 5mo agoOminous phrasing.
- SubiculumCode 5mo agoI doubt it. By not releasing it, Chinese companies will be unable to break TOS and use it to acquire high quality training data...which, I suspect, is how they've kept pace
- cedws 5mo agoZ.AI, Moonshot, DeepSeek all have a pipeline of data of their own now due to capturing a slice of the market through cheap tokens. It's not impossible to imagine that they might share the data too if the CCP thinks that will help their AI strategy.
- SubiculumCode 5mo agoNo. Most data generated this way is poor quality. It's not the user responses and or queries. If the user does not know better than the LLM, you can generate bad responses. The value is in taking a superior model, submitting a query, and getting a higher quality output than you yourself could have generated, and using that to boost your model.
- Tostino 5mo agoYou identify users doing real work and implementing a project over a long period of time and train on their traces.
- verve_rat 5mo agoYup, we are somewhere between "my model can beat up your model" and "you wouldn't know my model, it lives in Canada". This is the world we live in.
- RajT88 5mo agoI am convinced the models are not as good as they say, but everyone benefits from the continued AI hype, so nobody says so.
- jwr 5mo agoI have no idea why people still even attempt to believe anything that comes out of Altman's mouth. Do we not learn from the past?
- apples_oranges 5mo agoIdk about Altman, I missed that he’s a bad guy now apparently, but people also still listen to certain politicians that routinely lie every day and don’t even bother to make the lies fit the other ones they said before, so..
- xandrius 5mo agoYou missed literally every single post/article about the guy?
- giwook 5mo agoMore likely that confirmation bias acted as a filter.
- GuB-42 5mo agoAltman played no small part in the current price of RAM. He told everyone he would buy 40% of all the RAM, causing shortages and a huge increase in price, just to take it back a few months later. So yeah, he is a bad guy now. People don't become bad guys just because they lie. The consequences of their actions (and their lies) matter more. Take Elon Musk for instance, he has always been a recognized liar, even when he was a good guy. What changed? Before, he was famous for making the electric car people actually wanted to drive, and cool rockets. Then came the politics: supporting the party most of his fans disliked, being responsible for many government job losses, in particular in the field of environmental preservation (ironic for a supporter of "green" energy), etc...
- giwook 5mo agoThat's far from the only reason why he's "a bad guy" now.
- feverzsj 5mo agoWith subsidy gone, token price goes sky high. The biggest shit show is about to happen.
- xandrius 5mo ago[flagged]
- jurgenburgen 5mo agoThat’s great but who will pay for all the data center debt?
- robohoe 5mo agoThe taxpayers and paying customers that’s who!
- cmiles8 5mo agoThe debt goes bad and those that issued the debt absorb losses. Many that went in deep lose their shirts. Thats how this stuff works, although there’s a whole generation that’s not seen the back side of a bubble and seems to think there’s no such thing as a downside.
- throwaway132448 5mo ago2007 called they want their free-market philosophy back.
- giwook 5mo agoJust their shirts? I'd rather lose my pants if I had to lose anything, so then I'd still be presentable for Zoom calls.
- 2ndorderthought 5mo agoLet them fail before it gets even worse is my take. The future is small but capable local models.
- SadErn 5mo ago[dead]
- pluc 5mo agoMy thinking is that if there would be more money in releasing Mythos and Cyber than there is in just scary unverifiable (or verified using very favorable context - Mythos) propaganda, they would. These aren't people that go for second best or care about the state of the world.
- xandrius 5mo agoMake it sound "scary good", tell everyone and their mom, charge gullible companies $$$$$ for its premium access and then move on.
- lossolo 5mo agoAnd government contracts.
- andsoitis 5mo ago> charge gullible companies $$$$$ The following companies are participating in Project Glasswing (to get out in front what vulnerabilities Mythos is able to find and exploit at scale): AWS, Apple, Broadcom, Cisco, CrowdStrike, Google, JPMorganChase, Linux Foundation, Microsoft, NVIDIA, Palo Alto Networks. Do you think they are all in that gullible category? https://www.anthropic.com/glasswing https://www.anthropic.com/glasswing
- 0123456789ABCDE 5mo agothey are already getting paid for opus 4.7, why would they release mythos? assuming mythos is a paper tiger: great marketing, keep going assuming mythos is for real: err, does this have to be explained?
- neuronexmachina 5mo agoI've never seen this explicitly stated, but I assume they also want to show due diligence in case their models are used to write successful exploits that lead to major cyberattacks. Given the current WH's ire towards Anthropic, I could see the current DOJ trying to file criminal charges for aiding/abetting/export-violations/etc.
- 5mo ago
- cmiles8 5mo agoIt’s a marketing move, pure and simple. Put up velvet ropes outside… leak out rumors about the horrors inside. Whether it’s LLMs or carnies with tents full of “freaks” it’s the same playbook. Watching OpenAI tumble from the clear market leader into “hey guys us too!” territory has been insightful.
- Xmd5a 5mo ago>Me: ok but you did not answer my question: is it possible to engineer paranoia ? >ChatGPT: This content was flagged for possible cybersecurity risk. If this seems wrong, try rephrasing your request. To get authorized for security work, join the Trusted Access Cyber program.
- lmeyerov 5mo agoWe have been getting increasingly hit by this. We do defense, not offense, and AI refusals to run defense prompts has been going noticeably up. Historically, tasks used to only get randomly rejected when we were doing disaster management AI, so this is a surprise shift in refusals to function reliably for basic IT. Related, they outsourced the TAP verification to a terrible vendor, and their internal support process to AI, so we are now in fairly busted support email threads with both and no humans in sight. This all feels like an unserious cybersecurity partner.
- intended 5mo agoThey are selling an impossible product. If you make an LLM more safe, you are going to shift the weight for defensive actions as well. There’s no physical way to assign weights to have one and not the other.
- Borealid 5mo ago> If you make an LLM more safe, you are going to shift the weight for defensive actions as well. > > There’s no physical way to assign weights to have one and not the other. Do you think a human is capable of providing assistance with defense but not offense, over a textual communication channel with another human? If no, how does a cybersec firm train its employees? If yes, how can you make the bold claim that it's possible for a human to differentiate between the two cases using incoming text as their basis for judgement, but IMpossible for an LLM to be configured to do the same? Note that if some hypothetical completely-determinstic LLM that always rejects "attack" requests and accepts "defense" ones can exist, the claim it's impossible is false. Providing nondeterministic output for a given input is not a hard requirement for language models.
- le-mark 5mo agoIt’s clear at this point local models are sufficient so what gives? These big providers don’t have a leg to stand on. Their only path to relevance is super ai that local models can’t run. So the “we have it but you can’t use it” is either true or a con. I bet it’s a con. I personally am ready to buy the drop when this bubble pops.
- bryancoxwell 5mo agoI’m not up to date on local models, but is that clear?
- deleted 5mo ago[deleted]
- le-mark 5mo agoLocal models are 6-12 months behind the “frontier” models. This mean anthropic, openai, and google don’t have a moat, they’re on a treadmill running to stay ahead. Treadmills don’t justify their valuation.
- literalAardvark 5mo agoGemma4:e4b is crazy good and quite usable on 10 years old midrange hardware. Not sure about the security capabilities and haven't tested it all that well, as I usually just use hosted models, but I do find myself using it and it's been quite successful for parsing unstructured data, writing small focused scripts and translations. The fact that I retain control of the data itself makes it incredibly useful, as I work in an environment where I can't just paste internal stuff into Codex. But since it's run locally on a toaster testing it is out of scope for me. It takes a fairly long time to do anything.
- mnmnmn 5mo ago[dead]
- NBJack 5mo agoLeaders both influence their followers with, and tend to hire those that reflect, their own values. I'm not surprised.
- seanhunter 5mo agoThey came to do a "deep dive" developers' workshop with us and all the materials were things that are literally on their public website. Let that sink in: Their idea of a deep dive for developers was to have some sales guy read us parts of their website.
- paradox460 5mo agoSounds like most corporate deep dives I've attended tbh
- sexylinux 5mo agoIs this a model that will finally work without creating errors?
- ilia-a 5mo agoSilly move since combo of skills/agents can achieve same results on most recent models anyway
- 0123456789ABCDE 5mo agoand you know this because you have privileged access to their internal models
- samrus 5mo agoI built the terminator bro, i swear. This time it actually is the terminator and its gonna kill us all. Its too dangerous bro i cant let anyone have it i swear to god Unless ... idk it sounds crazy but giving me $200/mo might actually make it safe. Lets do that
- Cthulhu_ 5mo agoThis exact thing was described in an article yesterday or day before: https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20260428-ai-companies-want-you-to-be-afraid-of-them https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20260428-ai-companies-wan..., https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47949750 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47949750
- builderminkyu 5mo ago[flagged]
- giancarlostoro 5mo agoI wonder how long till some breakthrough comes along that makes a new architecture that can run efficiently and cheaper on basic hardware, that'd be the real AI bubble, if you could train and run inference locally at lower cost. Microsoft had one that is supposed to run fine on regular CPUs though I'm not sure how far along we can reasonably take that. They say our brains can store 2.5 PB, but we use drastically less (though I can't find a ballpark) of "RAM" to reason about things, so makes you wonder, just how efficient can we take things. Our bodies use drastically less power too. https://huggingface.co/microsoft/bitnet-b1.58-2B-4T https://huggingface.co/microsoft/bitnet-b1.58-2B-4T
- segmondy 5mo agoHow long? We already have that. Qwen3.6 have 35b/27b models that beat chatgpt4o. You can run them at home in one GPU. DeepSeekV4 just came up with a new way to have super long context with KV cache an order of magnitude smaller than before. It's already going on!
- giancarlostoro 5mo agoI've been experimenting with running a few models for local inference, some of them get "stuck" in a repeat loop of trying the same thing endlessly, its weird. Others are really good. If they can ever handle about 400k tokens (maybe less, but from experience with Claude after the 1 million token increase this seemed to be a good sweet spot) without going batcrap crazy I'll be impressed, mostly because I would like them to read more of the codebase instead of just making assumptions. Although I've been building a custom harness, and I'm just about to start working on the tool building features for the harness. I already have a system similar to what Beads does but I didn't like some things about Beads so I made my own to track tasks, so context window doesnt need to be super massive for task tracking.
- dinfinity 5mo ago> Our bodies use drastically less power too. To be fair, we compute a lot slower too. No way in hell are you (or I) able to produce 'tokens' at the same speed as current models. It'd be interesting to see an actual comparison of humans and AI performing the same (cognitive) task and measuring the amount of energy that was used.
- outside1234 5mo agoIs this the new artificial scarcity "sign up for beta access to GMail"?
- dk970 5mo ago[flagged]
- expedition32 5mo agoAlways read the fine print of your all inclusive resort.