| ▲ | jryle70 3 hours ago | |
> based on... vibes According to whom? > Do we really have to re-learn all the industry's knowledge the hard way? Yes we do. That's why there is the saying "regulations are written in blood". Especially for LLM, which not too long ago a lot of people on HN dismissed as stochastic parrot and next token generator. | ||
| ▲ | gck1 3 hours ago | parent [-] | |
> According to whom? It's very easy to answer this without my help by trying to get access to Mythos. Do you see requirements clearly listed anywhere?Can you even apply? What you'll find is maintainers of large open source projects and analysts' reports with vague statements like - "should follow strict security requirements": "Trinidad also noted that the Anthropic announcement pointed out that each of the 150 new participants, in Anthropic’s phrasing, “will need to meet our security requirements before they gain access.” Trinidad said the security requirement claim doesn’t build confidence, because “nobody knows what those security requirements are.” [1] It's also some random rich companies like Hitachi or Dragos [2] Do you trust that Hitachi and hundreds of other random organizations will be able to contain Mythos and not accidentally attack your project or your bank? I don't. > Yes we do. That's why there is the saying "regulations are written in blood" We absolutely don't. We have already learned with blood that gating access to security based on the number of zeroes in bank account and authority is a horrible model. We can apply this knowledge to LLMs, we don't have to spill blood again. [1] https://www.csoonline.com/article/4180265/anthropic-grants-p... [2] https://www.bankinfosecurity.com/anthropic-limits-on-ot-acce... | ||