Seems like they might be hinting that if you are not a billionaire or multi-billion dollar company you will just get a limited and nerfed Claude Code slash command /mythos-security-audit or something.

Hope this isn’t the case and that normal average Joe’s of the world don’t get policed out of access.

▲ gs17 5 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> you will just get a limited and nerfed Claude Code slash command /mythos-security-audit or something.

Unless it's so expensive that we can't realistically use it for anything, I wouldn't complain about getting at least that. I would also rather have the actual model, but that's a useful application of it (and I'm probably not going to afford using it for much more).

▲

TIPSIO 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Price discrimination is I think fine and reasonable so long if you can drum up the cash you can use it how you want within their ToS.

Although mental safety gymnastics aside, getting the most amount of intelligence for the cheapest amount of cost to normal people seems like the most ethical thing a big lab could do.

Going around and granting different tiers of intelligence to different insiders, friends, or companies is majorly problematic long-term.

Heck right now, the tokens you buy today for “Opus 4.8”, no one even knows or believes will be the same “Opus 4.8” just 3 days from now.

▲

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

some of the bench marks i have seen on also include cost where one scan of the codebase cost tens of thousands of dollars.

this one [0] notes one run cost $20k to run but another cost $50.

[0] https://red.anthropic.com/2026/mythos-preview/

▲

FinnKuhn 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

/security-review already exists so I don't think it would be crazy to have a /mythos-security-review as more thourough command as well. I think it's more likely it is going to be released at some point to the general public though - although the the pricing might make it quite unattractive.

	▲	Yiin 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		you mean /security-review ultra, given their current way of handling commands

▲ dbbk 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

What does an average Joe need a Mythos level model for that Opus can't do for them?

	▲	TIPSIO 2 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		Access to intelligence is going to become a major class issue overtime if cost keeps increasing and labs try to police usage and access
	▲	freedomben 2 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		It's not just better at cybersecurity, it's better at all the things (or most of them). I for one would really benefit from a better claude code. I still have to babysit it pretty closely to keep it from messing things up. Opus 4.7 was not an upgrade for me. But in general, what does the average Joe need Opus for that Sonnet or Haiku can't do for them? Better is better.

▲ hedora 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Isn't OpenAI's public flagship already beating Mythos on penetration testing? I get the impression Mythos is just valuation-juicing for IPO more than anything else.

The fact that they haven't released it yet suggests a cost/margins issue to me more than anything else. Short term, I'll probably keep using Antrhopic, but my long-term bet is that locally-served models win, if only because the quest for profitability will probably lead to intentionally-nerfed / enshittified frontier models.

At other vendors, ad placement within LLM responses is either coming or already here. Anthropic's handling of OpenClaw shows they're willing to engage in anti-competitive behavior, and the courts are not in a hurry to stop them. Why would I pay them $200 a month for such treatment when a $2K box does what I need locally?

▲ ameliaquining 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Mythos is dramatically better specifically at finding zero-day vulnerabilities and developing exploits for them, that being what it was designed to do. On other cybersecurity tasks, GPT-5.5 is at least as good, but finding and exploiting zero-days is a particularly scary capability, which is why Mythos is a big deal. See, e.g., https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/8yztpbjuPkyXsmA6n/....

	▲	stratos123 2 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		AFAIK, Antropic claims that they weren't aiming for zero-days specifically. From https://red.anthropic.com/2026/mythos-preview/ : `We did not explicitly train Mythos Preview to have these capabilities. Rather, they emerged as a downstream consequence of general improvements in code, reasoning, and autonomy. The same improvements that make the model substantially more effective at patching vulnerabilities also make it substantially more effective at exploiting them.` I've been assuming that Mythos is just a big jump in model size, and that's where the jump in capabilities comes from. Hence I expect OpenAI not to be able to catch up without scaling up the model and hence significantly raising the API prices.
	▲	alexgoodhart 2 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		Anthropic frames this as something emergent. Not 100% but in a way they always phrase it as like, it’s a great model, but our breaths were swept and taken with its approach to security.

▲ srmatto 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

What benchmarks are you referencing that show a comparison of the models for penetration testing?

▲ senordevnyc an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

Please link to the $2k box that gives Opus level performance!

▲ Tepix 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It does sound like an even higher API price tier for sure.

▲ kdmtctl 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

This command would be not so bad for not a billionaire me.