What’s worse is that this is part of a larger strategy of scaring the public to get regulatory capture

It’s just gross and manipulative. You have no moat, get over it

pAtCh ThE pLaNeT today, tomorrow it's creepy rent-seeking behavior

Not marketing. It is a crime related to fraud or securities fraud.

It's not hard tho, the default mode of thinking should be to never trust what a US corporation says.

This isn't a security incident as much as it is a marketing opportunity for all these companies.

I can't think of how it'll really eliminate prompting, but needing to carefully phrase your language already seems in the way out? Wasn't one of the prompts leading to solving fields problems just "look for fields problems and try very hard" or the equivalent

Yeah, I was explaining this as magic words. It seems like knowing `pandoc` means you can convert any kind of document into any other kind of document.

Knowing uv means you can scaffold any python project. docker lets you build any infrastructure kit.

Thanks for the "Ski-bi dibby dib yo da dub dub" earworm

Few works are released directly to the public domain. It is my understanding that the public domain doesn't even exist in all legal jurisdictions.

Most people license out the software under specific requirements and prohibitions. BSD requires attribution. GPL variants require adherence to copyleft when distributing derivative works. A little under half of all github repos don't even have a license, which means that though the source is published, no one has any license under which to copy it or derive new works from it.

So far as I have seen, whether aggregating and munging these works into abstract LLM weights constitutes fair use is still legally unclear. If not deemed fair use, it is almost certainly a massive violation of copyright.

Worth noting that the ai giants 'stole' from open source, but they also stole from closed source.

That is, they knowingly and willingly broke the law by stealing an unprecedented volume of proprietary, copyrighted materials (Bartz v. Anthropic).

It’s marketing, but in a global good will sense of “look how much OpenAI cares about secure open source.”

This works for established profitable brands that want to build / maintain a good public image.

This isn’t the marketing needed by an unprofitable startup that wants to show hyper growth before its IPO. They need the “use our product or get pwned” kind of marketing.

Calif found the vulnerability, not OpenAI

If they can find the vulnerability anyone can. This whole "patch the planet" is marketing trying to cover up for the danger AI is unleashing on internet infrastructure.

No idea what your comment is even about. The researchers that found and reported this did not sit on this for 2 months.

> 1 August 2026 [...] Ryan Austin finds the RCE paths, tweets a cryptographic hash on 5 August, and submits the bug and working RCE proof-of-concept to PHP between 11 August and 14 August.

> 19–24 August 2026: Wiz Research independently collides with the same bug family using Wiz Atlas, Gemini 4 Argon, and GPT-5.6 Sol, reporting its variants on 24 August.

I get some skepticism about marketing copy, but your comment is blatantly wrong and needlessly rude.

>In other words: criminals.

You're not required to disclose bugs, nor is developing exploits a criminal offense (assuming no intent/conspiracy to hack stuff).

But the window was arguably already broken? The opposite would be something like the "bury-head-in-sand economy"?

The disease is unleashing these powerful AI tools to the public before even thinking about the risks.