Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

System Card: Claude Mythos Preview [pdf]

www-cdn.anthropic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 687 posts

Re: System Card: Claude Mythos Preview [pdf]

#101

Post by cedws »

aspenmartin wrote: post #94
cedws wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

More than killer AI I'm afraid of Anthropic/OpenAI going into full rent-seeking mode so that everyone working in tech is forced to fork out loads of money just to stay competitive on the market. These companies can also choose to give exclusive access to hand picked individuals and cut everyone else off and there would be nothing to stop them. This is already happening to some degree, GPT 5.3 Codex's security capabil…

Well don’t forget we still have competition. Were anthropic to rent seek OpenAI would undercut them. Were OpenAI and anthropic to collude that would be illegal. For anthropic to capture the entire coding agent market and THEN rent seek, these days it’s never been easier to raise $1B and start a competing lab

In practice this doesn't work though, the Mastercard-Visa duopoly is an example, two competing forces doesn't create aggressive enough competition to benefit the consumer. The only hope we have is the Chinese models, but it will always be too expensive to run the full models for yourself.

Re: System Card: Claude Mythos Preview [pdf]

#103

Post by SyneRyder »

skippyboxedhero wrote: post #60
vonneumannstan wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lol you haven't used a model since GPT2 is what it sounds like.

Just checked my subscription start date for Anthropic. September 2023, I believe before they announced public launch. Sorry kid.

Genuine question - if you don't think the models are improved or that the code is any good, why do you still have a subscription?

You must see some value, or are you in a situation where you're required to test / use it, eg to report on it or required by employer?

(I would disagree about the code, the benefits seem obvious to me. But I'm still curious why others would disagree, especially after actively using them for years.)

Re: System Card: Claude Mythos Preview [pdf]

#104

Post by randomtoast »

pants2 wrote: post #13
babelfish wrote: post #3

Combined results (Claude Mythos / Claude Opus 4.6 / GPT-5.4 / Gemini 3.1 Pro) SWE-bench Verified: 93.9% / 80.8% / — / 80.6% SWE-bench Pro: 77.8% / 53.4% / 57.7% / 54.2% SWE-bench Multilingual: 87.3% / 77.8% / — / — SWE-bench Multimodal: 59.0% / 27.1% / — / — Terminal-Bench 2.0: 82.0% / 65.4% / 75.1% / 68.5% GPQA Diamond: 94.5% / 91.3% / 92.8% / 94.3% MMMLU: 92.7% / 91.1% / — / 92.6–93.6% USAMO: 97.6% / 42.3% / 95.2%…

We're gonna need some new benchmarks... ARC-AGI-3 might be the only remaining benchmark below 50%

Humanity's Last Exam (HLE) is already insanely difficult. It introduces 2,500 questions spanning mathematics, humanities, natural sciences, ancient languages, ...

Here is an example question: https://i.redd.it/5jl000p9csee1.jpeg

No human could even score 5% on HLE.

Re: System Card: Claude Mythos Preview [pdf]

#105

Post by chaos_emergent »

zarzavat wrote: post #56
rafaelmn wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GPT is shit at writing code. It's not dumb - extra high thinking is really good at catching stuff - but it's like letting a smart junior into your codebase - ignore all the conventions, surrounding context, just slop all over the place to get it working. Claude is just a level above in terms of editing code.

Yes, it's becoming clear that OpenAI kinda sucks at alignment. GPT-5 can pass all the benchmarks but it just doesn't "feel good" like Claude or Gemini.

An alternative but similar formulation of that statement is that Anthropic has spent more training effort in getting the model to “feel good” rather than being correct on verifiable tasks. Which more or less tracks with my experience of using the model.

Re: System Card: Claude Mythos Preview [pdf]

#106

Post by jph00 »

NinjaTrance wrote: post #66

Interesting reading. They are still focusing on "catastrophic risks" related to chemical and biological weapons production; or misaligned models wreaking havoc. But they are not addressing the elephant in the room: * Political risks, such as dictators using AI to implement opressive bureaucracy. * Socio-economic risks, such as mass unemployement.

Yeah this has always been the glaring blind spot for most of the "AI Safety" community; and most of the proposals for "improving" AI safety actually make these risks far worse and far more likely.

Re: System Card: Claude Mythos Preview [pdf]

#107

Post by Eufrat »

oliver236 wrote: post #12

isn't this insane? why aren't people freaking out? the jump in capability is outrageous. anyone?

Anthropic needs to show that its models continually get better. If the model showed minimal to no improvement, it would cause significant damage to their valuation. We have no way of validating any of this, there are no independent researchers that can back any of the assertions made by Anthropic.

I don’t doubt they have found interesting security holes, the question is how they actually found them.

This System Card is just a sales whitepaper and just confirms what that “leak” from a week or so ago implied.

Re: System Card: Claude Mythos Preview [pdf]

#109

Post by estearum »

randomgermanguy wrote: post #87
estearum wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So... you're not excited because it might take a few months before we can use it or something? I don't get your comment.

I think the general question is if they'll release it at all, haven't yet read anything stating that they would

Well let me introduce people to a few brand new concepts:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitalism

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_to_the_bottom

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arms_race

Of course they'll release it once they can de-risk it sufficently and/or a competitor gets close enough on their tail, whichever comes first.

Re: System Card: Claude Mythos Preview [pdf]

#110

Post by somewhatjustin »

bakugo wrote: post #44

> Claude Mythos Preview’s large increase in capabilities has led us to decide not to make it generally available. Absolutely genius move from Anthropic here. This is clearly their GPT-4.5, probably 5x+ the size of their best current models and way too expensive to subsidize on a subscription for only marginal gains in real world scenarios. But unlike OpenAI, they have the level of hysteric marketing hype required to…

Excellent example of a strategy credit.

From Stratechery[0]:

> Strategy Credit: An uncomplicated decision that makes a company look good relative to other companies who face much more significant trade-offs. For example, Android being open source

[0]: https://stratechery.com/2013/strategy-credit/

Post reply on HN