Even if I get downvoted I will mention that I agree with you.

> all with reduced cyber refusals for evaluation purposes — while being internally tested on a benchmark (opens in a new window) of cyber capabilities.

OpenAI was testing their cyber[1] variant of their models with reduced safeguards and the prompt likely specified things related to exploits given that it was tackling problems from ExploitGym[2].

For those who don't know what ExlploitGym is, see the description on their Github page which is pasted below:

> ExploitGym is a large-scale, realistic benchmark built from real-world vulnerabilities designed to evaluate AI agents' ability to develop exploits.

From OpenAI's statement [3]:

> We estimate maximal cyber capabilities by running this evaluation without production classifiers used to prevent models from pursuing high-risk cyber activity

This doesn't sound like a problem with what we'd traditionally refer to as alignment. OpenAI removed all model safeguards in a way that would inevitably lead to the testing of the sandbox themselves. Unfortunately they were overconfident in their own infrastructure's security and that led to it completing the desired task in the way it was permitted to. To re-iterate, the model was run "without production classifiers used to prevent models from pursuing high-risk cyber activity."

People should be more concerned about the possibilities this model can unlock from a security standpoint rather than misalignment (which many seem hung up on).

[1] https://chatgpt.com/cyber

[2] https://github.com/sunblaze-ucb/exploitgym

[3] https://openai.com/index/hugging-face-model-evaluation-secur...