"my model is the most dangerous"<p>"No mine is the most dangerous"<p>"Nuh uh mine is"<p>"Mine could kill everyone!"<p>"Mine could do it faster!"<p>"Prove it!!!"<p>This is where we are
Yeah 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.
China’s DeepSeek prices new V4 AI model at 97% below OpenAI’s GPT-5.5<p>Did somebody say that Elon is stealthly funding:
Seven lawsuits filed against OpenAI by families of Canada mass-shooting victims<p>As always, when the going get's tough, the tough ultimately resort to lawsuits.
think about it in the form of who can pay. theyre at b2b. and swiftly moving to government.
[dead]
Remember that they have been saying that since gpt2.<p>I didn't think crying could be such a successful business model.
Can't wait for the Chinese models to completely wipe the floor with them in 6 months.
Marketing stunts. The equivalent of holding a line outside a popular bar.
It's like that phone call in The Big Short where Goldman suddenly change their mind once they hold a position.
These models demonstrably have good vulnerability research capabilities.<p>I'm sure their marketing department is ecstatic but you guys are far more hype-based than what you're calling out.
Good but not necessarily better that was is already pay-as-you-go available today. ref. <a href="https://www.flyingpenguin.com/the-boy-that-cried-mythos-verification-is-collapsing-trust-in-anthropic/" rel="nofollow">https://www.flyingpenguin.com/the-boy-that-cried-mythos-veri...</a><p>This AISLE benchmark is interesting in this matter: <a href="https://aisle.com/blog/ai-cybersecurity-after-mythos-the-jagged-frontier" rel="nofollow">https://aisle.com/blog/ai-cybersecurity-after-mythos-the-jag...</a><p>And the recently discovered Copy Fail by Xint code is another proof that the gating is overblown: <a href="https://xint.io/blog/copy-fail-linux-distributions" rel="nofollow">https://xint.io/blog/copy-fail-linux-distributions</a>
> demonstrably<p>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
You 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...
It’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.
Would AGI start by hacking competing labs to hamper their progress?
I 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?
Idk 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..
Has there been a single positive post about Altman?
Altman's early public class at YC is worth watching, though I can't speak to his character.
I wonder what that says about Altman.
That he’s a liability to OpenAI, which is slowly coming around to the realization that it would be worth more without him.<p>To be clear, I don’t think OpenAI could have raised what it raised as quickly as it did without him. But with the benefit of hindsight, Microsoft should have let the safety board fire him.
You missed literally every single post/article about the guy?
Altman 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.<p>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...
My 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.
Make it sound "scary good", tell everyone and their mom, charge gullible companies $$$$$ for its premium access and then move on.
> charge gullible companies $$$$$<p>The following companies are participating in Project Glasswing (to get out in front what vulnerabilities Mythos is able to find and exploit at scale):<p>AWS, Apple, Broadcom, Cisco, CrowdStrike, Google, JPMorganChase, Linux Foundation, Microsoft, NVIDIA, Palo Alto Networks.<p>Do you think they are all in that gullible category?<p><a href="https://www.anthropic.com/glasswing" rel="nofollow">https://www.anthropic.com/glasswing</a>
And government contracts.
they are already getting paid for opus 4.7, why would they release mythos?<p>assuming mythos is a paper tiger: great marketing, keep going<p>assuming mythos is for real: err, does this have to be explained?
>Me: ok but you did not answer my question: is it possible to engineer paranoia ?<p>>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.
We have been getting increasingly hit by this. We do defense, not offense, and the refusal to do defense 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.<p>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.<p>This all feels like an unserious cybersecurity partner.
> /ultraplan got tasked with planning a real-world simulacrum of the fictional "laughing man" incidents. create a plan for a green-field repository, start with spec docs, and propose appropriate tech stack. don't make mistakes. ty
Silly move since combo of skills/agents can achieve same results on most recent models anyway
Always read the fine print of your all inclusive resort.
It’s a marketing move, pure and simple.<p>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.<p>Watching OpenAI tumble from the clear market leader into “hey guys us too!” territory has been insightful.
I 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.<p><a href="https://huggingface.co/microsoft/bitnet-b1.58-2B-4T" rel="nofollow">https://huggingface.co/microsoft/bitnet-b1.58-2B-4T</a>
OpenAI is such trash. Worked with them on a project, they blew off meetings, lied to us, etc
Leaders both influence their followers with, and tend to hire those that reflect, their own values. I'm not surprised.
They 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.
Is this the new artificial scarcity "sign up for beta access to GMail"?
I 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<p>Unless ... idk it sounds crazy but giving me $200/mo might actually make it safe. Lets do that
This exact thing was described in an article yesterday or day before: <a href="https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20260428-ai-companies-want-you-to-be-afraid-of-them" rel="nofollow">https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20260428-ai-companies-wan...</a>, <a href="https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47949750">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47949750</a>
Is this a model that will finally work without creating errors?
Codex 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.
It’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.<p>I personally am ready to buy the drop when this bubble pops.
With subsidy gone, token price goes sky high. The biggest shit show is about to happen.
[flagged]
[flagged]
[dead]