12 ms·
Expanding Project Glasswing
https://techcrunch.com/2026/06/02/anthropic-scales-claude-mythos-to-critical-infrastructure-in-15-countries/ https://techcrunch.com/2026/06/02/anthropic-scales-claude-my...
- testfrequency 5mo agoMythos gives BIG Tesla FSD energy, I’m over it
- atleastoptimal 5mo agoWhat does that even mean?
- conradludgate 5mo agoContinously saying "FSD will be ready next year" for the last N years
- atleastoptimal 5mo agoMythos was announced a few month ago and has been actually demoed in many companies who have all reported its abilities, supporting the claims made by Anthropic. How is this in any way similar to the FSD situation?
- UltraSane 5mo agoAll hype no substance.
- atleastoptimal 5mo agoMythos was announced a few month ago and has been actually demoed in many companies who have all reported its abilities, supporting the claims made by Anthropic. How is this in any way similar to the FSD situation?
- testfrequency 5mo agoTesla does* the same thing with “influencers”, close enough perhaps? Everyone either doesn’t have access, or always has the “bad version” and the “trust me it’s 10x better” version is always Coming Soon™
- atleastoptimal 5mo agoYou're conflating the protracted promises for full-self-driving with the current rollout of autonomous driving features in Teslas, a feature people are using today. I've driving with multiple people who use their Tesla self-driving and report its quality/accuracy, this isn't some overpromised future feature. And I mean, it's not like Anthropic is a zero-product company that is only offering gated access to their only product, Opus 4.7/4.8 are very good and are driving billions in revenue. Anyone can use it and see how good it is, and it is clear that it is a very good model at many things. It is no huge leap to imagine that a model that is 10x bigger is also better at many of the tasks that Opus is good at. They are gating the release because of cybersecurity/misuse concerns, which makes sense because 1. Existing models are already being used to find exploits and hack into systems 2. We don't know the effects of releasing a tool which can autonomously exploit systems, especially in a world driven by a "security through obscurity" philosophy. It makes sense to give a heads-up to patch up software that affects billions of users before releasing it. Imagining that this delayed rollout is all a big marketing scheme, that they have gotten dozens of multi-national companies to play along, and that Anthropic is somehow now just patently being dishonest about something while they have every incentive to not be dishonest (especially when they are neck and neck with OpenAI and their relative success depends on verified claims about model abilities), is pure conspiratorial thinking and driving more by a motivated cynicism about AI companies rather than a reasoned examination of the claims being made.
- philipwhiuk 5mo agoIt would have been nice to have a list of the 150, but I guess it would make them a hacking target?
- frays 5mo ago[flagged]
- bushido 5mo agoThis feels more and more like a marketing/scarcity play for the largest global corps. Will likely give them time to expand capacity as well. And make them harder to dislodge in these orgs.
- jb_briant 5mo agoUrgency x scarcity, unbeatable marketing move.
- aspenmartin 5mo agoTo me this makes little sense — I can’t imagine the orgs they have limited this rollout to don’t already have Claude subscriptions and integrations. And sure this may play nicely into branding a build a mystique around the model but ultimately they are missing out on a ton of revenue and risking being totally front-run now that model performance parameters are out and people have firsthand experience. Feels more like a fairly genuine attempt to be responsible. They could have easily rolled out an update and done some PR to absolve themselves of responsibility
- mentalgear 5mo agoHere's my big fear: Even IF (and that's a BIG if) we get all critical vulnerabilities fixed in tech (before adversarial/state-actors turn up with open attack models) - we still have (in at least a year) models that will be so good in social engineering that they can still (given enough tokens) gain access to whatever system they want. If society can't trust banks and other institutions to safely control their data, what follows ? Do we we collectivelly switch off the internet?
- colechristensen 5mo agoSocial engineering as a problem goes away when anybody can get a model to do it for them for $5. It stops being possible, it's really the bank's problem when they can't have a minimum wage call center or a robot responsible for people's data.
- p-e-w 5mo agoYes. There will be a few high-profile incidents, and then institutions will be forced to stop performing administrative actions based on people’s word.
- applfanboysbgon 5mo agoThis outcome is massively detrimental to humanity at large. By eliminating the human factor from support, you make it impossible to get support in edge cases that fall outside of the pre-planned bureacratic process. Everyone already hates that Google can arbitrarily ban anybody they please with no way to get in contact with a human, and you want to extend that to banks in control of people's life savings?
- repeekad 5mo ago> Everyone already hates that Google can arbitrarily ban people Yet they’re still the predominate search engine, sadly the concerns of the few don’t interest monopolistic profit seekers without forced regulations, think how airlines are legally required to give refunds for delayed flights, there’s a reason it required legislation
- 827a 5mo agoGPT-5.5-Cyber has already at least hit if not surpassed Mythos capability in cyber tasks. The only reason they're holding back is because once its out everyone would realize that its capabilities were a step change in March, but are not anymore, yet it costs significantly more and is much slower.
- john_strinlai 5mo agohow did you go about assessing this?
- jansan 5mo agoSo you believe one marketing department more than the other?
- NitpickLawyer 5mo agoThe brits have a step-based benchmark that they use for this - https://www.aisi.gov.uk/blog/our-evaluation-of-openais-gpt-5-5-cyber-capabilities https://www.aisi.gov.uk/blog/our-evaluation-of-openais-gpt-5... They seem pretty close, in both average and "best run" scores. And, in a highly verifiable domain, "best run" or pass@n is what you're looking for.
- aesthesia 5mo agoWorth looking at the followup post that evaluates the current version of Mythos, which solves one of the main tasks that GPT-5.5-Cyber does not. https://www.aisi.gov.uk/blog/how-fast-is-autonomous-ai-cyber-capability-advancing https://www.aisi.gov.uk/blog/how-fast-is-autonomous-ai-cyber...
- 827a 5mo agoI believe the correct way to interpret AISI’s findings is that both Mythos and 5.5-Cyber are capable of solving their full benchmark (the only two models that can); Mythos does it with fewer tokens and more consistently. Two things of note: 5.5-Cyber is likely to be substantially cheaper than Mythos, given it is priced around Opus. Additionally: AISI has never tested OpenAI’s best public model and actual Mythos competitor: 5.5-Pro.
- deleted 5mo ago[deleted]
- cmxch 5mo agoThat’s fine as long as I can identify and reject any Mythos derived patch as being irreproducible.
- IanCal 5mo agoWhy would it not be reproducible?
- cmxch 5mo agoIts analysis from prompt/harness to end products.
- IanCal 5mo agoYou can't do that for me either. Why would you refuse to use a patch that deals with a valid PoC exploit? If a random contributor posted an explanation of an exploit, showed it worked in an executable way, presented a patch and you could see that the exploit no longer worked - would you refuse to use the fix until the contributor showed how they figured it out?
- cmxch 5mo agoGiven where Mythos alleges to go, reproducibility far beyond a hash promise, an alleged (but not really proven) existence of an PoC, and “Trust me bro” is necessary. When an ungated (or even abliterated) public model can repeatedly, easily, and accurately embarrass Anthropic’s models, that might change.
- astrange 5mo agoHow can a patch be "reproducible"? The testcases are reproducible.
- cmxch 5mo agoHow Mythos’s mysterymeat got there from front to back.
- aspectop 5mo agoi think anthropic is being performative here, creating a hype for mythos and not releasing. i guess this is all a marketing thing to sell a security specialized AI to enterprise and startups at a way larger cost coz security market is deep in money.
- skybrian 5mo agoThis is just cover for being sore that you don’t have access yet <- see what I did there? People and organizations can have mixed motivations. It’s often not “just” one thing.
- jofzar 5mo ago> The organizations in this new group are based in more than 15 countries I mean most nasdaq tech companies would be in 13+ countries, why are they writing this like it's a big number, is hilariously small?
- newtonsmethod 5mo agoI assume they're using a more candid definition where they're not counting all the countries a company may be based, but rather the primary country they're based in. I don't think they're trying to flex this as a large number. They don't want to give an exact number, as that may change etc / is fuzzy, but also want to give you an idea of the scale. They say "In the future, we intend to expand our geographical reach much further". I imagine this commentary is somewhat related to the concerns that AI will create an even worse "global underclass". AI developments are first accessible to Americans, then allies, and then later the whole world.
- SpicyLemonZest 5mo agoThey're writing it in contrast to the previous scope, which doesn't seem to have been available to any organizations based outside the US. (There was news a few weeks ago about how Japanese banks were going to gain access, but based on the timing I think this announcement is that access.)
- aplthrowaway67 5mo agoHow "altruistic" of them. If only Anthropic extended this level of care to the environment or the economy.
- aspenmartin 5mo agoWhy do you think the impact to the economy is bad? Also, if youre talking about the environment from the lens of data centers, I agree they CAN be incredibly problematic and that should be regulated and pushed back against when they engage in problematic behaviors (stressing water supply in a drought area e.g.). But not blindly -- data centers can be a clear win-win in a lot of ways, especially if done right. "data centers = bad" is way way way too simplistic a picture
- aplthrowaway67 5mo agoThese are extremely common and well-discussed opinions, you can disagree with them but I would venture that asking "WHY do you think AI will negatively impact the economy?" is so ignorant it's not even a good-faith argument.
- aspenmartin 5mo agoCommon and discussed opinions they are, yet they ignore any actual econometrics or understanding of how the economy works
- aplthrowaway67 5mo agoLook man if you don't believe me that's fine, but you can take the word from what the AI CEOS are saying. or are these guys just as clueless? https://www.msn.com/en-in/technology/artificial-intelligence/just-mark-my-words-anthropic-ceo-dario-amodei-s-stark-warning-on-ai-driven-layoffs-says-ideology-won-t-survive-reality/ar-AA24xCVn https://www.msn.com/en-in/technology/artificial-intelligence... https://techstartups.com/2026/03/13/sam-altman-warns-ai-could-upend-jobs-and-the-economy-sooner-than-expected/ https://techstartups.com/2026/03/13/sam-altman-warns-ai-coul... https://www.inc.com/leila-sheridan/sam-altman-proposes-a-new-economic-system-for-the-ai-era/91327230 https://www.inc.com/leila-sheridan/sam-altman-proposes-a-new... I'm going to take Mark Twain's advice and not argue any further, if you have more thoughts to share I hear Opus 4.8 has tuned down its sycophancy a little bit
- tantalor 5mo agoThey should share it with Meta. https://www.0xsid.com/blog/meta-account-takeover-fiasco https://www.0xsid.com/blog/meta-account-takeover-fiasco
- fontain 5mo ago“Mythos Preview continues a long-term trend that we’ve been warning about for some time: within 6 to 12 months […]” The only trend Mythos continues is Anthropic’s trend of warning that disaster is always 6 to 12 months away.
- yanis_t 5mo agoIs there any evidence Mythos is qualitatively better than the Opus 4.x? I'm afraid that the usual mantra that "we just need more scale" that worked well for attracting investments, is not working anymore - bigger models provide marginal improvements while naturally get much more expensive to run. Is this why both Anthropic and OpenAI are rushing for IPOs this year?
- alasano 5mo agoFrom what I've read so far it's less about Mythos being much better at tasks in isolation. Security wise, it's about being able to find and chain multiple vulnerabilities to actually create viable exploits. So I would imagine that if you were using it for regular software development you may not feel that it's that different unless used in a particular way?
- pixl97 5mo agoThere seems to be some number of people here on HN that make their money in old style cyber security that seem to be under the delusion that LLMs are just going to go away and it's going to go back to business as usual for their cash cow. I work with a number of people in security that have come around, and while they still think LLMs are rather garbage at architecture, they see how well current models we can access now are at finding security issues. They can chain together wildly different concepts and turn them into working exploits.
- rfgplk 5mo agoIt probably isn't, at least in terms of security or memory safety. The current models can already sniff out all memory vulnerabilities with relative ease, you can't really beat that.
- JacobAsmuth 5mo agoHave you read firefoxes findings? They found it to be qualitatively improved over Opus, and have published several of the resulting CVEs as well as more detailed numbers.
- jb_briant 5mo agoStep 1: claim you created a tool so dangerous you can't release it Step2: offer to test it, but only for the biggest companies in the world Step 3: onboard those big players on your tooling and product Step 4: profit This is genius.
- estearum 5mo agoAnd all you have to do is demonstrate unique value during the pilot phase! Err... wait... that was already the hard part... hmm
- jb_briant 5mo agoGenius marketing move doesn't mean there is no value. It means than even if the value you offer is similar as your competitors, you are the one conquering the market. That's the only way to not becoming a commodity.
- geodel 5mo agoWith trillion dollars at stake they can hire best of best in sales and marketing. And unlike some hardcore hackers who may have ethics that does not always move in direction of more money. Sales and marketing people are highly motivated for opportunities to make more money.
- andrewjneumann 5mo agoThey keep writing like they stand to profit from this or something. Too many “coulds” in there for me too, this could be an amazing advancement and it could be nothing… normally we look at data and last headline I saw was 25 “high” vulnerabilities at the cost of $1 million in tokens. No comparison to human teams, and I’m sure that $1 million in tokens was used by humans, in a team. So like most AI, they’ve developed a tool that capable people can use to be better, but unlike most tools, they’re claiming this to be outright magic. The magic is the hype train.
- ianm218 5mo agoIn case the topic of memory safety is interesting to anyone I've been experimenting with using AI agents to port common web infra projects to safe/ performant Rust. Somewhat inspired by the Bun port - was thinking that at some point memory safety might be such a big deal that people just need drop in replacements. - Valkey/ Redis port here https://github.com/ianm199/valdr https://github.com/ianm199/valdr (passes ~99% of single node test suite, real prod features like replication/ clustering/ HA early or not implemented) - Further along port of Lua 5.1-5.5 https://github.com/ianm199/lua-rs-port/tree/main https://github.com/ianm199/lua-rs-port/tree/main - I have a less developed nginx version that would be the north star - These projects are very alpha at the moment If anyone is interested in getting involved in this or has done similar experiments I'd love to collaborate! There is so much variation in how you can run these large scale agent fleets I don't think anyone has a perfect system yet.
- dingnuts 5mo ago[dead]
- rxhampton 5mo agoIf someone is porting such disparate projects as Valkey and Lua it is just for show and will be pre-alpha forever. No one wants Bun in Rust, no one wants the rsync vibe code additions. This is just the only pro-AI comment, so the AI people voted it to the top.
- ianm218 5mo agoHmm my reasoning was that in order to have Nginx work in Rust you want to expose scripting so having a decent Lua in Rust is key to not call out to C for that. And then Valkey/ Redis is a lot simpler than nginx so it was a good way to learn how some of this works. And I'd disagree on no one wants - Lua is quite helpful since it is easily used in WASM. There has been some interest from people in the Bevy community - a game engine in Rust - since you can't have Lua scripting in browser games easily with the C version. But anyway if people want it or not memory safety might become much more important so I think it is a good area to explore. Some people think large C codebases are inherently unsecurable https://alexgaynor.net/2020/may/27/science-on-memory-unsafety-and-security/ https://alexgaynor.net/2020/may/27/science-on-memory-unsafet...
- iamniels 5mo agoWhats currently an open source project which comes closest to Mythos capabilities?
- adrian_b 5mo agoNo single open weights model comes close to either Mythos or GPT 5.5. Nonetheless, running many of the open weights models over a codebase, with an appropriate harness, can provide about the same vulnerability coverage (i.e. each of the open weights models would find a subset of what Mythos or GPT 5.5 could find, but the subsets are not the same). Despite needing more runs and more time, this may be significantly cheaper, especially if the models are self hosted. Based on what Anthropic said about Mythos, they also use a quite elaborate harness for finding bugs and vulnerabilities, i.e. not a simple prompt like "find the bugs". They run repeatedly Mythos on each file of the codebase, many times. They start with more generic prompts, used to determine whether a more thorough analysis of that file is worthwhile. Then they use more specific prompts, to detect various classes of bugs. After it becomes probable that a certain bug exists, they do a final run where the prompt requests a confirmation of the already known bug, perhaps together with a proposed patch or a PoC exploit. Therefore the efficiency of finding vulnerabilities depends a lot on the harness, not only on the LLM. Also, searching vulnerabilities in a big codebase when paying per token is very expensive, because it requires many runs of the LLM.
- mekpro 5mo agoIt’s clear that Anthropic has run out of the compute capacity needed to serve Mythos publicly. They’re using security concerns to mask their inability to deliver the model at scale, while still trying to maintain their lead over OpenAI. As a result, they’ve chosen to release it privately under the banner of an “ethical” rollout.
- pshirshov 5mo agoI bet Huawei and co would be happy to sell them some cheapo chips for inference!
- simonw 5mo agoThey started Glasswing before they struck that $1.25B/month deal with xAI/SpaceX for their (notoriously dirty) Memphis data centers. So they have a whole lot more compute now than they did last month.
- nickthegreek 5mo agoBut that compute might not be available to then long term. Hard to make big moves with a contract like that.
- simonw 5mo agoI don't know if any of the big AI labs have confidence in planning for the long term. For all they know they'll find a new optimization that lets them serve Opus class models for half the computing cost next month. Or someone will invent the next OpenClaw and demand will 10x over night.
- mekpro 5mo agoYes, 300 MW from SpaceX helps a lot, but I think that’s mainly to support Opus demand, which has grown faster than expected. If Mythos is roughly 5× more expensive to serve than Opus, as the pricing suggests, then 300 MW is nowhere near enough to enable large-scale deployment of Mythos. As an ordinary developer who relies on a $20–$200/month subscription, I feel disappointed by the release of a paper describing a model that I can’t actually use.
- mrbonner 5mo agoMaybe it is just me: I feel Anthropic most recent product announcements resemble more and more like what IBM tactic was at its high. For instance, the Watson AI hype after it defeated Kasparov. The difference is IBM actually wanted and let businesses buy and use Watson as opposed to time released like what Anthropic does to even boost the hype higher.
- 3sk_ask8 5mo agoBig Blue defeated Kasparov. The Watson hype was about winning Jeopardy, which is still kind of the only use case for current AI.
- cyanydeez 5mo agoExpanding Project Glasswing (IPO)
- 3sk_ask8 5mo agoAnthropic has the marketing of a weight loss product. - They still claim 10000 issues, but they found only one in curl. - They did not find rsync issues but Claude rather introduced rsync issues. - Facebook is a member of this cult program but Mythos did not find the account takeover flaw. - Mythos did not find the issues in Anthropic's own Bun rewrite. They will not release Mythos because it would be exposed as a fraud before the IPO.
- rfgplk 5mo agoIt's just pure marketing, and most people are falling for it. The primary issue stems from their definition of "vulnerability". Most C code will be _swimming_ in vulnerabilities depending on how you analyze it (ie function that accepts a pointer but doesn't validate -> potential vulnerability right there). The only thing that matters is if it's de facto exploitable or not.
- poemxo 5mo agoTo be fair the curl author is excellent at what he does.
- catigula 5mo agoI still find it funny that GPT-5.5 is just as good as Mythos and yet Anthropic likes to make things worse than they actually are.
- aspenmartin 5mo agoWhat's your basis for this?
- andai 5mo ago[dead]
- cassianoleal 5mo agoIn the meantime, not everyone with actual access to the model are all that impressed. https://cyberplace.social/@GossiTheDog/116679693992983945 https://cyberplace.social/@GossiTheDog/116679693992983945
- dymk 5mo ago“Cybersecurity weather person and award winning shitposter.” why are they someone we should pay attention to the opinion of?
- jchw 5mo agoThat's someone who is confident enough to have an evidently successful enough career to be able to access Mythos in its currently-limited rollout and yet not take themselves terribly seriously online. Realistically their opinion deserves to hold more weight than the median HN comment.
- dymk 5mo agoI dunno, I trust the engineers working on Firefox or the Linux kernel more than some random pseudo-anonymous Mastodon account - https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2026/05/mozilla-says-271-vulnerabilities-found-by-mythos-have-almost-no-false-positives/ https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2026/05/mozil... https://www.theregister.com/software/2026/03/26/linux-kernel-czar-says-ai-bug-reports-arent-slop-anymore/5226256 https://www.theregister.com/software/2026/03/26/linux-kernel...
- slopinthebag 5mo agoI definitely don't.
- jchw 5mo agoI would prefer a pseudo-anonymous account if possible. Obviously if this is a marketing stunt the very not anonymous feedback is called into question immediately. That said: I already was aware of Mozilla's account and despite what you are thinking, it essentially confirms everything. > The biggest differentiating factor was the use of an agent harness, a piece of code that wraps around an LLM to guide it through a series of specific tasks. For such a harness to be useful, it requires significant resources to customize it to the project-specific semantics, tooling, and processes it will be used for. Yep. Sounds exactly right. So the question is do we really need Mythos for this or can almost any reasonably close to frontier AI model accomplish similar results with a sufficiently advanced harness? Jury's out but my vote is "probably most of the way". After all, alongside all of the splashy zero days dropped by eager AI companies, Greg Kroah-Hartman has been posting many useful, if minor patches to the Linux kernel produced by nothing more than a single 128 GiB Framework Desktop. So apparently, even small models can be very useful if you can find a way to get the noise out. Mythos could still be very useful and effective and still be mostly a marketing ploy, and that's because until very recently investment in trying to make LLMs work for security auditing has been underserved. Without more substantial information, it's difficult to tell how much better at security research Mythos is vs say, Opus or DeepSeek 4 coupled with a good agent harness would be. And in that sense, it's the same sort of crap as the GPT-2 and GPT-3 releases. A lot of hooplah about how dangerous it is to humanity. Then it turns out it's only dangerous enough that it needs to be gated behind an additional monthly subscription.
- airstrike 5mo agoI'll share the first-hand account I recently got from someone else. > We've used it at work > it is... not as hype as everyone is concerned about > I'd argue the framework around it for security scanning is the arguably more useful side of the tool, definitely doesnt take a huge model to get all the issues it flagged on our systems > For us, it absolutely flooded us with noise > I mean hundreds if not thousands of false positives or minor issues or not applicable > For every one reasonable issue > The biggest issue it created was the execs treated every issue it produced like it was a drop everything and fix the issue type deal > I'm talking company wide drop all things "we need to patch nginx because this module that no one uses and is disabled by default has this RCE vulnerability™ > Or "all ec2 AMIs need to be upgraded because it flagged a a version specific docker vulnerability", it flagged every single machine with docker regardless of if the actual vulnerability was relevant > Vulnerability was with a very specific Auth plugin configuration you could enable with docker and specifically the Mosley docker compatible tool, but it is clear it only knew there was a vulnerability in docker, not if it was applicable or not > Meanwhile dirtyfrag and friends not a single peep from btw despite it allowing for container escape > Idk, I was underwhelmed with the quality of the reporting it gave really. If the company allowed me to get information about all the infrastructure in our entire organisation to run Claude over it repeatedly looking for recent CVEs I'm sure I could produce the same results...
- jr-throw 5mo agoI'm pretty impressed with regular Claude Code with Opus 4.7/4.8 in finding vulnerabilities in our code. Maybe 70% are false positives though. It's a lot of work to manually push back on the findings. Still worth it.
- steve_adams_86 5mo agoIt's similar with performance optimizations. One example was Claude thinking we could optimize converting vector tiles to raster by operating in float32 rather than float64. It turned out the library we have to use casts to float64 anyway, so the work of casting to 32 then to 64 rather than staying at 64 actually slowed the path down by 12%. Yet it also finds the odd thing that isn't very intuitive but leads to marked improvements I never would have uncovered because... Well, as a human with only 24 hours in a day, there's no way I'll turn over every leaf and find these items on my own. I'm totally fine with the false positives because they're so easy the verify.
- aliljet 5mo agoIs this just one giant marketing plot?
- hasteg 5mo agoThere's a lot of speculation that it is indeed a marketing plot and the model is just a step improvement over current capabilities... and the real reason they aren't releasing the model is they are compute constrained and cannot serve the model. To my knowledge there's no proof of this however, but given the fact that literally 60 days ago they made Mythos out to be the end of the world and last Friday they announced that they will release the model in a few weeks, I feel like it was indeed something along those lines (marketing ploy).
- basch 5mo agoOr just control of supply and demand. If they can charge twice as much serving half as many customers, that leaves a lot of potential future customers leftover.
- kspacewalk2 5mo agoTheir IPO is coming up soon. It would be interesting if Mythos remained mythical right up until then, wouldn't it?
- datakan 5mo agoThe week before they released Mythos to governments they had all their source code stolen. It's all about improving their image and creating propoganda.
- pixelesque 5mo agoIt wasn't "all their source code", it was the source code to Claude Code: not really any of their internal secret sauce, at least directly.
- 0123456789ABCDE 5mo ago
- waffleiron 5mo agoNot so sure I would want a company that does not see any issues with mass surveillance of my country [1] to have access to critical infrastructure or its source code where I live. [1] https://www.anthropic.com/news/statement-department-of-war https://www.anthropic.com/news/statement-department-of-war : > But using these systems for mass domestic surveillance is incompatible with democratic values.
- 3asdkab 5mo agoSo, they expand the program to US "ally" governments and corporations. These entities will now give all their IP to an American company that only promises not to spy on Americans. Subsequently, the NSA can audit the leaked sources manually and find real exploits.
- CephalopodMD 5mo agoThis is either a chuffed up PR move or an extremely generous alpha fold "publish all the proteins" moment
- saidnooneever 5mo agoPR. their models dont do anything more than others. neither do their tools. they have very agrressive and misleading marketing. work in cyber for 15+ years, worked at largest CS vendor globally and fortune5 companies. (top of the list). only ppl using AI are shops with clueless ppl getting flooded in nonsense. You will see the same sentiment in a different flavor (different products) in OSS security mailing lists now. do not fall for it. for every one of these things. Test it, verify it, for yourself. dont take anyone's word. 100B+ valuation makes external voices generally worthless (easy to buy) Im not saying its all worthless or will never amount to anything. But test yourself. please. a lot of money is getting chucked around. Look at it this way. They have a stake in having companies create not very good software. They have a stake in supplying engineers to fix that. They have a stake in tools to fix problems that it creates. you can guess the next service offering...
- not_a9 5mo ago> only ppl using AI are shops with clueless ppl getting flooded in nonsense. Are Hex-Rays and Vector35 clueless?
- merrvk 5mo agoGot to say, Anthropic have hell of a marketing team.
- maipen 5mo agoI don't get how this is event front page of HN.
- dyauspitr 5mo agoGrow up, what else would be? This is about as relevant as it gets to this forum.
- yalogin 5mo agoWe are in the early stages of monetizing the AI stack/service and Anthropic is set to take it in. Not sure if it’s cost effective for them or not but they are clear winner here. They have created this awareness among executives about the value and need for AI and that is what matters, it will be budgeted accordingly. They are positioning it as a must have not just for productivity but also beyond that as a Swiss army tool , pretty smart
- strictnein 5mo agoWork in a top tier security org at a Fortune 50. We still can't get access to this stuff, even though we've reached out repeatedly. I mention this because if you're frustrated that you can't access it, you're not alone. Even with our company's heft and a security org that is very well known in the industry we're getting nowhere.