I wonder if it coincidentally becomes safe to release when compute capacity bought from SpaceX will provide enough headroom to let a lot more people run it.

▲

lukeschlather 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

It seems like Mythos is often (or typically?) costing $20k per vulnerability, so I don't think there will be enough compute capacity in the world any time soon to let a lot more people use it the way Glasswing is using it. That is not to say I think they are exaggerating its capabilities. That $20k is presumably the rough cost of renting the GPUs, and there are not enough GPUs in the world.

▲

InsideOutSanta 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I'm not sure if current pricing correlates with actual compute cost.

▲

why_only_15 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

what's the origin of your $20k/vuln estimate?

	▲	gck1 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		It's the same as the origin of "Codex/Opus subscription usage is heavily subsidized" - the sales departments equipped with AI agents with the prompt: "use anonymous accounts on the internet to make it easy for me to sell it at $price".

▲

sigmar 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

"available to qualifying customers’ security teams on request." Seems they're already expanding access.

▲

unethical_ban 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Total speculation: As the software world shakes out the many hidden vulns in their software, big AI will try to limit the access while it gets ironed out. Once the big projects/systems are reasonably patched after being vetted by SOTA models, the models will be released to the public. I don't think there's a scenario where Mythos-level or better models stay closed permanently.

▲

b65e8bee43c2ed0 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

stop noticing things, chud.