151–160 of 921 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's exactly not what they're doing. They aren't creating operating system vulnerabilities. They're telling you about ones that already existed.
Well, in a slightly indirect manner. Claude is writing a ton of code, and therefore creating a lot of security vulnerabilities.
Pricing for Mythos Preview is $25/$125, so cheaper than GPT 4.5 ($75/$150) and GPT 5.4 Pro ($30/$180)
For comparison, 5x the cost of Opus 4.6, and 1.67x for Opus 4.1 I think this would be very heavily used if they released it, completely unlike GPT 4.5
I really wanted to like anthropic. They seem the most moral, for real. But at the core of anthropic seems to be the idea that they must protect humans from themselves. They advocate government regulations of private open model use. They want to centralize the holding of this power and ban those that aren't in the club from use. They, like most tech companies, seem to lack the idea that individual self-determination i…
(And no, the Linux Foundation being in the list doesn't imply broad benefit to OSS. Linux Foundation has an agenda and will pick who benefits according to what is good for them.)
I think it would be net better for the public if they just made Mythos available to everyone.
It's messed up that Anthropic simultaneously claims to be a public benefit copro and is also picking who gets to benefit from their newly enhanced cybersecurity capabilities. It means that the economic benefit is going to the existing industry heavyweights. (And no, the Linux Foundation being in the list doesn't imply broad benefit to OSS. Linux Foundation has an agenda and will pick who benefits according to what is…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A thought experiment: It's April, 1991. Magically, some interface to Claude materialises in London. Do you think most people would think it was a sentient life form? How much do you think the interface matters - what if it looks like an android, or like a horse, or like a large bug, or a keyboard on wheels? I don't come down particularly hard on either side of the model sapience discussion, but I don't think dismissi…
Interesting thought experiment. I would say, if you put Claude in an android body with voice recognition and TTS, people in 1991 would think they are interacting with a sentinent machine from outer space.
It's messed up that Anthropic simultaneously claims to be a public benefit copro and is also picking who gets to benefit from their newly enhanced cybersecurity capabilities. It means that the economic benefit is going to the existing industry heavyweights. (And no, the Linux Foundation being in the list doesn't imply broad benefit to OSS. Linux Foundation has an agenda and will pick who benefits according to what is…
Society is about to pay a steep price for the software industry's cavalier attitude toward memory safety and control flow integrity.
That said, I have been arguing for 20+ years that we should have sunsetted unsafe languages and moved away from C/C++. The problem is that every systemsy language that comes along gets seduced by having a big market share and eventually ends up an application language.
I do hope we make progress with Rust. I might disagree as a language designer and systems person about a number of things, but it's well past time that we stop listening to C++ diehards about how memory safety is coming any day now.
It's messed up that Anthropic simultaneously claims to be a public benefit copro and is also picking who gets to benefit from their newly enhanced cybersecurity capabilities. It means that the economic benefit is going to the existing industry heavyweights. (And no, the Linux Foundation being in the list doesn't imply broad benefit to OSS. Linux Foundation has an agenda and will pick who benefits according to what is…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Thank god, finally someone said it. I don't know the first thing about cybersecurity, but in my experience all these sandbox-break RCEs involve a step of highjacking the control flow. There were attempts to prevent various flavors of this, but imo, as long as dynamic branches exist in some form, like dlsym(), function pointers, or vtables, we will not be rid of this class of exploit entirely. The latter one is the mo…
Everybody has been saying this for the last 15 years.