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

After dissing Anthropic for limiting Mythos, OpenAI restricts access to Cyber

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 139 posts

Re: After dissing Anthropic for limiting Mythos, OpenAI restricts access to Cyber

#121

Post by andriy_koval »

wirybeige wrote: post #106
philistine wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No one has yet to turn a profit from LLMs. I don't understand why we need to intently look at everybody's pricing, when the most important number is instead their losses. That is the number that tells us what they're really doing.

Why would these 3rd-party providers be taking losses? Together, Novita, etc... are not losing money on inference services, they are profiting. You can easily do napkin math with current & last gen Nvidia cards to calculate cost to host/serve these models. I would also doubt that any 1st-party providers like OpenAI and Anthropic lose money on per token billing. There is almost undoubtedly healthy margin being made on…

> Why would these 3rd-party providers be taking losses?

we are in market capture phase. Domestically hosted Chinese LLMs is a descent market to capture.

Re: After dissing Anthropic for limiting Mythos, OpenAI restricts access to Cyber

#122

Post by JumpCrisscross »

righthand wrote: post #115
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the US media incessant coverage of a private company’s business matter of firing someone as if it was an unheard of A CEO getting fired, not by the for-profit company's Board, but by a board with a public mission, right after said company released a groundbreaking product that captured the popular imagination and then turned that into a multibillion dollar deal with Microsoft (which in turn parlayed into trillions…

Not one worth 4-5 days of coverage as the news media helps sane wash the situation. Pouring over every development as if the end result mattered. OpenAI was already showing signs of abandoning their mission so the news reports weren’t about that. They were about publicizing the situation and turning the tide against the ousters. It was well done but it was not GOOD reporting or GOOD news coverage or even IMPORTANT to…

> sane wash

This term has taken the cultural place of FUD. I’m starting to see it as another thought-terminating cliche. Like yes, people should be trying to understand what happened in those days.

> Where’s my and the rest of the economic workers check

I never made any claims around how it’s distributed. The fact that this wealth exists, and is sprouting up in multiple sectors, is indisputable. (Whether it’s paper wealth is another question. But people are cashing in massively and across the economy, albeit outside jobs that code.)

Re: After dissing Anthropic for limiting Mythos, OpenAI restricts access to Cyber

#123

Post by keeda »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #110
keeda wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That he’s a liability to OpenAI, which is slowly coming around to the realization that it would be worth more without him. I'm curious what you're basing this on. Are you aware of any grumblings on the inside? From the outside it appears no different than before largely because it seems everybody knew he was a slippery dude anyways, but they tolerated it because he was slippery in ways that were profitable. I also…

> Despite Anthropic possibly having a better product I think OpenAI will prevail simply because he's gone to extreme (sometimes diabolical, cf that DRAM deal) extents in ensuring they have enough compute Anthropic is currently raising tens of billions of dollars at a favourable valuation to fund infrastructure needs. From a shareholder perspective, that beats raising the capital ahead of demand. > OpenAI could win si…

True, but all the hyperscalers and neoclouds have been severely capacity crunched for multiple quarters and have a backlog of a trillion+ dollars. So even if Anthropic wants capacity it's going to be a) hard to come by (like Dario said on Dwarkesh, 2 - 3 year lead times) and b) even more expensive because of the scarcity and intense competition. OpenAI won't need to lock Anthropic out if they've already locked in the future capacity (presumably at much more favorable rates) in advance.

(That said, I'm not sure what the Stargate deal falling through means.)

Re: After dissing Anthropic for limiting Mythos, OpenAI restricts access to Cyber

#124

Post by cedws »

SubiculumCode wrote: post #117
cedws wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Z.AI, Moonshot, DeepSeek all have a pipeline of data of their own now due to capturing a slice of the market through cheap tokens. It's not impossible to imagine that they might share the data too if the CCP thinks that will help their AI strategy.

No. Most data generated this way is poor quality. It's not the user responses and or queries. If the user does not know better than the LLM, you can generate bad responses. The value is in taking a superior model, submitting a query, and getting a higher quality output than you yourself could have generated, and using that to boost your model.

AI companies have been using synthetic data for ages now. The data doesn't need to yield new insights to be useful for training.

Re: After dissing Anthropic for limiting Mythos, OpenAI restricts access to Cyber

#125

Post by red-iron-pine »

Avicebron wrote: post #47
gordonhart wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a surprisingly concrete and defensible definition of AGI.

Is it defensible? It sounds like a thin disguise over "income for me but not for thee"?

that's just capitalism

Re: After dissing Anthropic for limiting Mythos, OpenAI restricts access to Cyber

#126

Post by red-iron-pine »

Analemma_ wrote: post #86
michelb wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Has there been a single positive post about Altman?

The funny thing is that a lot of Altman's reputation has come from other VCs and Valley-types taking about him in a way they consider positive. Every quote about Altman from another VC is like, "Altman, what a great leader. He's absolutely ruthless, he'll do anything to win: lie, cheat, steal, kill. He has what it takes to succeed in this business." They say this because in their circles it's a compliment, and nobody…

> The funny thing is that a lot of Altman's reputation has come from other VCs and Valley-types taking about him in a way they consider positive. Every quote about Altman from another VC is like, "Altman, what a great leader. He's absolutely ruthless, he'll do anything to win: lie, cheat, steal, kill. He has what it takes to succeed in this business."

"game recognize game"

Re: After dissing Anthropic for limiting Mythos, OpenAI restricts access to Cyber

#127

Post by dyauspitr »

dyauspitr wrote: post #94
DivingForGold wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

China’s DeepSeek prices new V4 AI model at 97% below OpenAI’s GPT-5.5 Did somebody say that Elon is stealthly funding: Seven lawsuits filed against OpenAI by families of Canada mass-shooting victims As always, when the going get's tough, the tough ultimately resort to lawsuits.

It’s their promo price till the end of May. It’s also not nearly as good as 5.5. I’ve had 3 different tasks just this week that deepseek has failed at that 5.5 does perfectly.

I just tried to do some large scale summarization and Deepseek v4 pro is pretty shit. This cannot even touch 5.5. 5.5 took 3 mins and the output was stellar, Deepseek took 20 and did not adhere to the output format at all after multiple attempts.

Re: After dissing Anthropic for limiting Mythos, OpenAI restricts access to Cyber

#128

Post by Borealid »

intended wrote: post #118
Borealid wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you make an LLM more safe, you are going to shift the weight for defensive actions as well. > > There’s no physical way to assign weights to have one and not the other. Do you think a human is capable of providing assistance with defense but not offense, over a textual communication channel with another human? If no, how does a cybersec firm train its employees? If yes, how can you make the bold claim that it's…

> IMpossible for an LLM to be configured to do the same? Because that’s what I am seeing emerge from the various efforts to build LLM safety tools. > Do you think a human is capable of providing assistance with defense but not offense, over a textual communication channel with another human? LLM != human? They don’t even use the same reasoning process.

> Because that’s what I am seeing emerge from the various efforts to build LLM safety tools.

Something having not been obtained so far is not a logical argument it is impossible to obtain that thing.

> LLM != human? They don’t even use the same reasoning process.

There are a finite number of possible input strings of a given length. For any set of input strings, it is possible to build a deterministic mapping that produces "correct" answers, where those correct answers exist. Ergo anything a human can do correctly with a certain set of text inputs, it is possible to build an LLM that performs equally well. You can think of this as hardcoding the right answers into the model. The model itself can get very large, but it is always possible (not necessarily feasible).

It's only impossible for an LLM to do something right if we cannot decide what it means for the answer to BE right in a stable way, or if it requires an unbounded amount of input. No real-world tasks require an unbounded input.

Re: After dissing Anthropic for limiting Mythos, OpenAI restricts access to Cyber

#129

Post by Borealid »

beering wrote: post #101
Borealid wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you make an LLM more safe, you are going to shift the weight for defensive actions as well. > > There’s no physical way to assign weights to have one and not the other. Do you think a human is capable of providing assistance with defense but not offense, over a textual communication channel with another human? If no, how does a cybersec firm train its employees? If yes, how can you make the bold claim that it's…

> Do you think a human is capable of providing assistance with defense but not offense, over a textual communication channel with another human? > If no, how does a cybersec firm train its employees? In general, no, humans can’t be sure they are only helping with defensive and not offensive work unless they have more context. IRL, a security engineer would know who they’re working for. If they’re advising Apple, then…

If the task is ill-defined, then it's a bit unfair to make it sound like the problem is that an LLM can't be configured to do something, if a human would have an equally hard time with the same task. The statement "it's impossible to configure the weights to..." should really be something more broad like "it's impossible to...".

I have no comment about whether it's impossible to determine the intentions of a person asking for assistance through a textual conversation with that person.

Re: After dissing Anthropic for limiting Mythos, OpenAI restricts access to Cyber

#130

Post by pluc »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #112
pluc wrote: post #13

My thinking is that if there would be more money in releasing Mythos and Cyber than there is in just scary unverifiable (or verified using very favorable context - Mythos) propaganda, they would. These aren't people that go for second best or care about the state of the world.

> These aren't people that go for second best or care about the state of the world My suspicion is an adult in the room realised that simultaneously pissing off every major corporation, government and NGO, and giving them an incentive to bottle you up immediately, could backfire massively. That an inference for Mythos is probably beyond what Anthropic can provide at scale right now.

I don't mean to get into politics but domination by alienation seems to be a trendy American strategy
Post reply on HN