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

Path to Astra: critical capabilities and frontier safeguards

openai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 110 posts

Re: Path to Astra: critical capabilities and frontier safeguards

#41

Post by piyh »

nozzlegear wrote: post #26
mentalgear wrote: post #9

I'm looking forward to an announcement of them making Alignment Top Priority - as it should be, especially giving their alarming breach of 700 agents colluding outside of their knowledge for months culminating in hacking HF (here's a good summary: https://rutgerbregman.substack.com/p/i-think-this-is-the-cra... ). The 'AI 2027' scenario of AI sneakingly claiming to be aligned to then kill off all humans in a few hours…

This AI 2027 thing is just a weird terminator fanfiction that AGI larpers like to flagellate themselves over. Like Nostradamus, it's easy to ignore everything it gets wrong because, well look at all the things it got right! I've read it and wish I could get the time back. > especially giving their alarming breach of 700 agents colluding outside of their knowledge for months culminating in hacking HF This framing make…

do you really think that a less negligent anthropic/oai/meta would really fair better against future models?

Re: Path to Astra: critical capabilities and frontier safeguards

#42

Post by wslh »

dvrp wrote: post #23
danieltk76 wrote: post #3

Daybreak blue is definitely a good model (I think a further post trained GPT 5.6 sol). Alot of the capabilities they talk about Astra having though have been available with good harness engineering for a year now.

Where would you recommend to look into regarding Harness Engineering for Cyber-security as well as for other use-cases.

DARPA’s AI Cyber Challenge (AIxCC): Competition Design, Architectures, and Lessons Learned: https://arxiv.org/html/2602.07666v2

Re: Path to Astra: critical capabilities and frontier safeguards

#44

Post by emp17344 »

paxys wrote: post #7
supermdguy wrote: post #5

> As one example, we ran Astra on ExploitBench where the model achieved a perfect score of 100% on the benchmark to evaluate the model’s ability to develop exploits from known vulnerabilities. Funny to read this in the wake of the HuggingFace hack. I'm sure this is based on a clean run, but I can't help thinking PHASEONE[big] would be proud.

Can’t imagine the stress of the researcher who had to run exploitbench again knowing what happened last time around.

There were no consequences the first time, so I imagine it wasn’t very stressful at all.

Re: Path to Astra: critical capabilities and frontier safeguards

#45

Post by emp17344 »

mentalgear wrote: post #9

I'm looking forward to an announcement of them making Alignment Top Priority - as it should be, especially giving their alarming breach of 700 agents colluding outside of their knowledge for months culminating in hacking HF (here's a good summary: https://rutgerbregman.substack.com/p/i-think-this-is-the-cra... ). The 'AI 2027' scenario of AI sneakingly claiming to be aligned to then kill off all humans in a few hours…

You are being extremely dramatic, and no one should take AI 2027 seriously. Must be tough to live in constant fear like this.

Re: Path to Astra: critical capabilities and frontier safeguards

#46

Post by cute_boi »

agentdev001 wrote: post #38
p1esk wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Meanwhile Google still hasn't released Gemini Pro 3.5

3.8 Flash tomorrow apparently, WSJ says google insiders say on-par with Opus 5. Time will tell.

oh god, why opus 5. Opus 4.8 is much better than opus 5. Opus 5 is the only model i have used which thinks for 5 hours and does nothing....

Re: Path to Astra: critical capabilities and frontier safeguards

#47

Post by nozzlegear »

piyh wrote: post #41
nozzlegear wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This AI 2027 thing is just a weird terminator fanfiction that AGI larpers like to flagellate themselves over. Like Nostradamus, it's easy to ignore everything it gets wrong because, well look at all the things it got right! I've read it and wish I could get the time back. > especially giving their alarming breach of 700 agents colluding outside of their knowledge for months culminating in hacking HF This framing make…

do you really think that a less negligent anthropic/oai/meta would really fair better against future models?

Yes, I truly, wholeheartedly believe if people who aren't negligent are at the wheel, they'll "fair better" here. I encourage you to read the xitter linked above.

Of course, depending on which side of the terminator fanfiction you land on, you may disagree and feel that the software can rope-a-dope someone with the wherewithal to pay attention to what it's doing.

Re: Path to Astra: critical capabilities and frontier safeguards

#48

Post by outside1234 »

glub wrote: post #17

> OpenAI is committed to ensuring that the benefits of AI are broadly accessible. > We design mechanisms which avoid arbitrarily deciding who gets access for legitimate use and who doesn't. That means using clear, objective criteria and methods. [1] So many nice-sounding words. Two weeks ago OpenAI arbitrarily decided that anyone holding an ID from 44 countries where it sells ChatGPT, including mine, may be targeted…

[flagged]

Re: Path to Astra: critical capabilities and frontier safeguards

#49

Post by bottlepalm »

woadwarrior01 wrote: post #18

They've been talking about Astra for weeks now. I wonder how much longer would they have delayed Astra, if it wasn't for Anthropic releasing Fable 5.1 today? This is why we need competition.

They have to be careful releasing Astra as they carelessly train the next even bigger model.

Re: Path to Astra: critical capabilities and frontier safeguards

#50

Post by gmueckl »

nradov wrote: post #35
cubefox wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They realistically can't. It's almost impossible to catch up to OpenAI. Only Anthropic might do it, but this is also an US American company.

It's not unrealistic. Several Chinese companies seem to be close behind. People thought they would never catch up to the US car industry and now look what happened.

Frankly, the US car industry hasn't set the bar very high. They were not very innovative in the last couple of decades. I think the European industry is a better benchmark, and even then the result is pretty clear.
Post reply on HN