| ▲ | evilturnip 3 hours ago |
| This whole thing is comedy. Anthropic pretending Mythos 5 is so capable it's going to destroy everything, but will release it anyway with "safeguards" (when does this ever work?). US Gov't using this fake hype as an excuse to handicap Anthropic simply because they have a vendetta. |
|
| ▲ | koolala 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| Nothing is funny about LLMs being restricted like air travel. |
| |
| ▲ | graphime 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | > Nothing is funny about AI being restricted like air travel. Yeah it is. Unless you work at Anthropic, OpenAI, Google, or Meta. Your stocks/RSU are at risk of losing significant value. | | |
| ▲ | koolala 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | No it isn't. LLM's are a form of access to information like Libraries or the Internet. | | |
| ▲ | sethops1 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | The content produced by LLMs is literally stolen from the internet. | | |
| ▲ | dbmnt 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Imagine a super intelligent speed reading human in a library. If they read all the books and are able to understand, conceptualize and summarize that knowledge for others, is it theft? The books weren't stolen, after all, just read. The knowledge in the books wasn't taken away; it's still there for others to read. I personally do not believe knowledge can be stolen. | | |
| ▲ | AlecSchueler 33 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | > Imagine a super intelligent speed reading human in a library. If human abilities were different then human laws would be different. We don't have speed limits for joggers but we do for cars because their abilities are materially different. | |
| ▲ | arrrg an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Machines aren’t humans. Your first have to argue that an analogy between machine and human even makes any kind of sense. That‘s the magic trick you are doing with your analogy. You just assume that human/machine analogy is true. | |
| ▲ | dylan604 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Is that super speed reading human going to then make itself available to instantly-ish answer any and every possible question from anyone with a paid subscription? This argument is pretty lame. | |
| ▲ | asd88 34 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | By extension, do also believe this super intelligent human should have no human rights and be enslaved by Anthropic for profit? | |
| ▲ | hackable_sand an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Reading this comment is like visiting a care home for dementia patients | |
| ▲ | tomalbrc 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Imagine a super greedy company putting every bit information they can, willingly and maliciously hiding the origin of training data, into a computer and reselling that data.
Such wow. Much shittie metaphor. | |
| ▲ | MagicMoonlight an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | [dead] |
| |
| ▲ | koolala 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Knowledge being 'owned' isn't some noble truth. To me, information being able to be shared freely online is the noble thing. | | |
| ▲ | ambicapter 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | The internet is still on? | | | |
| ▲ | kdheiwns 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Agreed. That's why it's disgusting that these AI companies charge such outrageous fees for information they should be giving back to us for free. | | |
| ▲ | koolala 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | We pay to access the internet as well to cover infrastructure costs. Paying per byte is still a thing today too. |
|
| |
| ▲ | rockskon 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | That various companies such as Google are working to kill. They're an advertising company that is making it increasingly clear they no longer want to link to their competition. Competition being defined as any source of information that is not Google. | |
| ▲ | 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | [deleted] | |
| ▲ | kelseyfrog 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Intellectual property is private property whose time has come. |
|
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | alexwwang 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| People always exaggerate the thing they don’t understand. |
|
| ▲ | MattyRad 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| My first thought is that this government-Anthropic feud is good publicity for both of them. - Anthropic is seen as a victim/hero
- They get Government-endorsed model hype
- Monday will be a bad publicity day with the new Agent SDK limits, this overrides/dominates the headlines
- The government gets to appear like they're ahead of the curve
- The government gets to appear forcible and weapons-conscious (and maybe earn some right-wing points)
The government is possibly a real threat here, but it's also possible that this is a case of knights rallying the mooks (https://ribbonfarm.com/2020/01/16/the-internet-of-beefs/), and the models will be back online Monday with a note that "we gave em hell in court because we're so smart and dedicated and talented and good at beefing" |
|
| ▲ | anon373839 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| I wonder if there even is a real vendetta. How many people in the administration / friendly with the administration would benefit financially from the IPO? Maneuvers like this still pump more air into the hype balloon. I suspect that Anthropic and its backers did not enjoy the many "meh" reviews that Fable has received for its modest bump in output quality. |
| |
| ▲ | efitz 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | I don’t think there’s a vendetta. I think that Dario is an ideologue who has been letting his ideology cloud his business judgment. I don’t think he’s playing 4D chess; I think he truly believes all the “AI is going to eliminate all the jobs” crap. I think his “Claude Constitution” is wishful thinking and his attempts to exert control over what his customers lawfully do with the product he sells them have made his company untrustworthy; certainly so by the US Dept of War. I think lately his advisors have made him tone down the doomerism noting that it might tank his IPO, and I am uncertain whether his recent pushes towards more regulation are regulatory capture attempts or ideology or both. The man is smart but IMO shouldn’t be running the company- he should be a CTO and let a business person make the decisions. As for the government, bureaucracies gonna do what they always do. If you scare them they regulate you. ITAR is a real thing and the government throws it at technology all the time, from the minds that brought you 40-bit SSL in the 90s. | | |
| ▲ | vitalyan1234 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | >I think lately his advisors have made him tone down the doomerism noting that it might tank his IPO, and I am uncertain whether his recent pushes towards more regulation are regulatory capture attempts or ideology or both. and I think there's a dozen people carefully crafting every doomerism, which is then handed over to a dozen guerilla marketing companies to be spread far and wide. | | |
| ▲ | dare944 an hour ago | parent [-] | | Rather like the people crafting the submissions to your 5 day old account |
|
| |
| ▲ | trhway 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Anthropic drops defense work, OpenAI picks up, Anthropic files for IPO, after that OpenAI files for IPO, now Anthropic's IPO looks not that good... thus making for much better OpenAI IPO. I'm wondering whether the Trump's son has any connection to OpenAI as the companies he is connected to have been very lucky to get various government benefits/contracts/etc. on "pure merits". And that: https://www.cnet.com/tech/services-and-software/trump-ai-exe... "OpenAI's Sam Altman Meets With Trump in Wake of Executive Order on AI" | | |
|
|
| ▲ | ai_fry_ur_brain 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| That or an excuse to put controls on all AI and massage the message for why we have to ban Deepseek. |
|
| ▲ | coliveira 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Where's the people who complain about the government picking winners? Strange that they suddenly travel somewhere without internet or lose their vocal cords. |
|
| ▲ | bottlepalm 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| I find it funny that AI keeps getting bigger, and the mental gymnastics needed to trivalize the progress get bigger as well - ie the government shutdown an AI model twisted into now even the government is being tricked. Everyone is tricked except me. Only I know AI isn't as smart as everyone thinks it is. |
| |
| ▲ | throwaway74628 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | “Too dangerous to release” has been exploited for marketing. A sizeable plurality of the informed public know as much. Regulatory capture is a thing. | |
| ▲ | SepiaSapient 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I'm sorry that I think that "Our LLM is the missing element for a group to develop nukes or bioweapons" is marketing hogwash. I'll guess we will see when or if the IPO happens. The more probable claim (Trump just wants money) will be proved if Amodei buys Truth Social or something and pulls a Tim Apple. My (not very probable) tinfoil hat theory is sadly unverifiable, but very funny. Anthropic bribed some Trump minion to ban Fable and lock in the honeymoon period until just before the IPO. | |
| ▲ | reassess_blind 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Not as smart as everyone thinks it is, maybe, but a model like Fable 5 without safeguards against offensive cyber attacks would be a nightmare. There are millions of improperly secured web applications that, in the wrong hands, would be easily exploited by these models. | | |
| ▲ | lillesvin 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | There have been millions of trivially exploitable vulnerabilities out there for decades — many of which could be easily discovered by using simple scanning tools or manual probing. This is hardly a new situation and LLMs really aren't that impressive at pentesting — even with these simple exploits. Maybe they are if you're not a pentester, but then ZAP, Burp, Nessus, SQLMap, etc. are likely also impressive if you put a little effort into learning how to use them, but many AI-advocates aren't interested in learning skills themselves. It's the same situation as with vibe coding. Everyone and their grandma can have an LLM spit out a web application without any programming experience, but if you're a programmer, you'll likely quickly see some issues with maintainability and further development of the code base. | | |
| ▲ | zomiaen 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | >LLMs really aren't that impressive at pentesting The point is that Mythos apparently is quite capable and has developed novel exploits on its own. | | |
| ▲ | lillesvin 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | That's the claim, yes. Has any proof been made available yet? (Genuinely asking here because I haven't been paying that close attention.) |
| |
| ▲ | reassess_blind 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | [dead] |
| |
| ▲ | tayo42 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | In a substantially different way then how it is now? You can put something listening on 22, 80 and 443 and log how much stuff tries to get in. | | |
| ▲ | reassess_blind 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | Yes, it is substantially different. A targeted, relentless attack by a state of the art cybersecurity model is far more likely to find obscure vulnerabilities than a traditional automated attack/fuzzer. These models are so much better at finding security holes than anything we've seen before. |
|
| |
| ▲ | lazide 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Or you could use it, and see the massive disconnect between hype and reality yourself. It’s not hard. The market is built on hype, so of course it’s going to get hyped everywhere. | | |
| ▲ | bottlepalm 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | I've seen Fable reverse engineer binaries like nothing I've used before - Fable/Mythos is far from marketing hype. On top of that I think it's just stupid to think anyone in the marketing department at Anthropic has any part in the system card for a model. That kind of thinking just screams cope. | | |
| ▲ | IndeanCondor 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | This statement needs qualifiers. Are you claiming you have a raw binary to Fable and it just reverse engineered it by reading it? Or are you claiming (like for every other model released in the past 1.5 years) it's using an integration with Ghidra or BinaryNinja to assist - in which case I completely disagree even a 30B model can do that with those tools. Also an FYI, AI advancement and Anthropic are not synonymous. Someone asking Anthropic to back up their claims is not coping about AI, especially as independent benchmarking of Fable is giving equivalent or slightly above par results to GPT 5.5. The system card does not use any of the benchmarks used in the previous Opus 4.5+ system cards. All the scores are in Anthropic owned benchmarks. I find it extremely hard to believe the marketing department of the company was not involved in a material release to the public - which is the marketing departments literal job. | | |
| ▲ | bottlepalm 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | Yes with assist tools Fable was able to figure things out Opus 4.8 and ChatGPT 5.5 were unable to. Like significantly better. |
| |
| ▲ | mikojan 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | It is beyond absurd to assume a company dependent on unprecedented sums of investor money is NOT deeply integrating its marketing department in its operations. | | |
| ▲ | christoph 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | I’ll dream of a world where even 1% of that marketing money goes to customer support. |
| |
| ▲ | ikiris 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | The ai psychosis is real. We've played with it a good bit, it in no way matches the ridiculous hype. |
|
| |
| ▲ | ianm218 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | I feel like it is strange seeing some really smart people go full conspiracy theory tin foil hat. Half these threads think that Anthropic is playing some 5D chess game to purposefully get nationalized. |
|
