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

Will It Mythos?

swelljoe.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 232 posts

Re: Will It Mythos?

#181

Post by Tossrock »

shshnsnnsma wrote: post #62
Tossrock wrote: post #39

As I posted in another comment, I found Fable to be substantially more powerful than any previous model. However, this isn't just an ungrounded opinion - I uploaded my full session transcript and code created working on a very complex implementation, so people can judge for themselves, if they're interested: https://tossrock.substack.com/p/36-hours-with-fable

This is very cool, thank you for the write-up. What caught my eye is the complexity you assign to a project like this. It’s hairy but I wouldn’t call it super complicated. I find that super interesting to be honest because it probably means that it is really hard and I am just used to this shit now and it all looks doable to me now. I never think of anything as “complex”, certainly not my own work and I always think…

Thanks, and I can definitely relate to not wanting to assign complexity to one's own work. I think the trick there is that, once you know how to do something, it doesn't seem hard, even if acquiring the knowledge and skills to do it is itself quite a challenge. And I agree that, in some senses, it's not /that/ hard - I mean I'm not proving P=NP, here. It's a software engineering problem, with existing solutions. That said, there is a spectrum of difficulty, even within software engineering problems with existing solutions. Fizzbuzz is less complex than distributed systems. This particular problem strikes me as rather difficult, and one way you can tell (beyond the stuff I mention in the post around serialization, UI paradigms, meta applications, etc) is that earlier models /couldn't/ do it. Which is why Fable being able to, when they could not, was so exciting to me.

Re: Will It Mythos?

#182

Post by Tossrock »

flatline wrote: post #146
Tossrock wrote: post #39

As I posted in another comment, I found Fable to be substantially more powerful than any previous model. However, this isn't just an ungrounded opinion - I uploaded my full session transcript and code created working on a very complex implementation, so people can judge for themselves, if they're interested: https://tossrock.substack.com/p/36-hours-with-fable

A nit: did you go from Opus 4.5 to Fable? One of the big questions in my mind is how much of a real change Fable is over the existing models. Opus 4.5 -> 4.8 was also a major capability increase.

I've been using 4.6, 4.7 and 4.8 since each was released. I agree 4.5 => 4.8 is a jump in capability, but from my perspective was nothing like the jump from Opus to Fable. I encourage you to read the transcripts and form your own opinions, though!

Re: Will It Mythos?

#183

Post by antonvs »

RaSoJo wrote: post #84
airstrike wrote: post #54

Around February, Opus 4.6 was excellent. Smart, fast, proactive. Then it got lobotomized and it's never been the same after that nerf. 4.7 came along and it too was disappointing—not unlike 4.8, which despite feeling a smidge smarter, tends to write word salad and is basically unusable for some workflows. Fable felt like having access to that "old Opus" again, but a little smarter. Sort of like I'd expect an Opus 5 t…

This is exactly what I find frustrating. I get comfortable with the latest model X. Then a new sparkly model Y launches. I am like, I don't need your new fangled Y, that consumes more tokens. My needs are small and i am happy with the older X. But then X starts to degrade. At first subtly, and then drastically. So then I am forced to upgrade to Y. What I do not understand is: > is this a sneaky way for companies to p…

Can you think of many examples of a SaaS provider who regularly keeps old versions of a product around for customers to use?

A far more common scenario is that new versions are rolled out to everyone, without offering a choice, as soon as they're considered stable.

Older versions consume resources and require staff to spend time on operating and supporting them. Those resources could be used to run a newer version.

The tl;dr is the simple economics of any SaaS product.

If you want to be able to run old versions indefinitely and control the resources assigned to it, you need to self-host (an open model).

Re: Will It Mythos?

#184

Post by SwellJoe »

catigula wrote: post #135

What year are we in? >I am skeptical of the reasons given publicly, I suspect it’s really just so much more expensive to operate than their current models that they don’t want to offer it broadly, yet, given the difficulty they’ve had growing capacity to keep up with use. But, are they telling the truth about how good it is at finding security vulnerabilities or is it just more hype? Meanwhile, 1. Mythos is banned by…

The post was published on May 30, and written over a few days before that. Well before Fable was banned. And, before the NSA hacking thing. But, I am skeptical of the AI global catastrophe, it still feels like a mix of marketing hype and reality and it can be difficult to separate the two, coming from the hype men who run the AI companies.

Re: Will It Mythos?

#185

Post by ranyume »

antonvs wrote: post #183
RaSoJo wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is exactly what I find frustrating. I get comfortable with the latest model X. Then a new sparkly model Y launches. I am like, I don't need your new fangled Y, that consumes more tokens. My needs are small and i am happy with the older X. But then X starts to degrade. At first subtly, and then drastically. So then I am forced to upgrade to Y. What I do not understand is: > is this a sneaky way for companies to p…

Can you think of many examples of a SaaS provider who regularly keeps old versions of a product around for customers to use? A far more common scenario is that new versions are rolled out to everyone, without offering a choice, as soon as they're considered stable. Older versions consume resources and require staff to spend time on operating and supporting them. Those resources could be used to run a newer version. T…

> Can you think of many examples of a SaaS provider who regularly keeps old versions of a product around for customers to use?

Sure. Blender and Ubuntu offer long-lived old versions of their software that get regular fixes.

Re: Will It Mythos?

#186

Post by scotty79 »

SwellJoe wrote: post #164
scotty79 wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have ~100$/mo sub and I have Pro in chat app and Extra High in Codex for GPT-5.5 I think on sub tokens might be 100 times cheaper. The quota is also generous in my opinion. I can vibecode a lot most days of the week and not run out.

But GPT 5.5 on extra high is not Pro. When I looked into it, Pro was not available for agentic use via any rolling limits plan. But, I'll look again into whether there's some reasonable way to complete the test for GPT Pro.

Ah, right. Sorry, my mistake. I have access to it in chat but not in Codex.

Re: Will It Mythos?

#187

Post by DrewADesign »

chpatrick wrote: post #108
DrewADesign wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They are known to say "horrific things" and personification of the AI they are delivering. It sometimes sounds unprofessional even. It doesn’t sound unprofessional— it sounds unethical. Either they’re making something that they genuinely believe is unsafe but don’t want to stop because, you know, that’s business! Have you seen how much this shit costs? Or they’re deliberately making the entire country feel unsafe b…

Unless you think someone's going to build it, and either it's you or them, and you hope you can do it less horrifically.

And that somehow stops the other entity from building theirs anyway?

If Dario was altruistically trying to save us from the supposedly evil other party rather than pursuing oceans of cash, he’d have stayed in the nonprofit AI research space.

Re: Will It Mythos?

#188

Post by mixmastamyk »

RobertSponge wrote: post #33
mixmastamyk wrote: post #24

Could someone point the thing at Ventoy please?

What’s with ventoy?

Works at a very low level of course, pre-OS, filled with binary blobs, perfect for an xz-style or supply chain attack. I’ve not seen any confirmation, so just speculation.

Has not been famous enough so far to have someone invest in an audit, so this would probably be cheaper.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44810281

Re: Will It Mythos?

#189

Post by wrs »

IIRC from the Anthropic report, the alleged danger of Mythos isn’t that it finds more vulnerabilities than previous models, but that it’s significantly more successful at exploiting them. Which this doesn’t seem to test.

Re: Will It Mythos?

#190

Post by delusional »

netcan wrote: post #114
p0w3n3d wrote: post #98

I've read opinions that this a speculation to raise the Anthropic's value. They are known to say "horrific things" and personification of the AI they are delivering. It sometimes sounds unprofessional even. This line of communication might have even influenced the courts in the case of copyright violation ("it is not copyright violation if a person learned something and it knows it and thinks of it"). However algorit…

The copyright questions are unanswerable in my opinion. That is, they cannot be answered by looking for an essential "truth." Reasoning by analogy in this case is not abstraction. It's just shifting the determination to choice of analogy. Meanwhile, irl.. The best analogy is recent tech Innovations. The internet, social media... Online copyright was basically instituted when large tech companies were ready to do it,…

> Youtube, for example, built itself to massive size and locked in network effect advantages largely by violating copyright.

> At some point, the legal ambiguity was a problem for their ad business. They were ready to move into the current revenue share influencer-treadmill model for content. At this point online, copyright enforcement was necessary to reduce the risk of being flanked by a new video platform.

That is a gross mischaracerization. There was a time in that Viacom case that people were ligitimitely worried that YouTube would go away. The regime that YouTube has built now was established together with the large media companies, when those media companies could no longer ignore them.

Post reply on HN