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

Expanding Project Glasswing

anthropic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 261 posts

Re: Expanding Project Glasswing

#151

Post by dymk »

jchw wrote: post #146
dymk wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“Cybersecurity weather person and award winning shitposter.” why are they someone we should pay attention to the opinion of?

That's someone who is confident enough to have an evidently successful enough career to be able to access Mythos in its currently-limited rollout and yet not take themselves terribly seriously online. Realistically their opinion deserves to hold more weight than the median HN comment.

I dunno, I trust the engineers working on Firefox or the Linux kernel more than some random pseudo-anonymous Mastodon account -

https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2026/05/mozil...

https://www.theregister.com/software/2026/03/26/linux-kernel...

Re: Expanding Project Glasswing

#152

Post by overfeed »

jspdown wrote: post #133
baq wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t care if bun is written in zig, rust, go, f# or sql. If it works, it works. I also don’t care if it’s written by humans or LLMs or robot overlords from Alpha Centauri. Again, if it works, it works. The operative word here is ‘works’. Code is now cheap, QA still isn’t. Since people don’t really like doing the same thing twice, specs for working code have never been written. Nowadays there is no reason to not cr…

Who is going to maintain all these forks? The person forking it has no community and can't realistically be an expert in all of these domains. So no, it doesn't "work", it just worked at some point in the past.

> Who is going to maintain all these forks?

"Claude" would probably be the response of a typical tokenmaxxer. I have no desire to use software that was drive-by forked by someone who doesn't understand the trade-offs made by a project, or the values underpinning them. I'll AI-assisted domain-expert, or experienced maintainer who stumbled into the role over someone with no grounding in the domain being the human in the loop for AI agents.

Re: Expanding Project Glasswing

#153

Post by suttontom »

orrito wrote: post #140
deaton wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The question is, will anyone pay enough for Mythos to offset the opportunity cost of offering that much Opus? You don't want to end up in a spot where you don't have enough compute and your service's reliability degrades to an unusable state like xAI.

I feel like there's always a demand for the very best models, even at insane prices. If the opportunity cost is x times opus, maybe few but there will always be companies willing to pay x+1 times opus.

Isn't that kind of what they're doing with this rollout? Except they're just hand picking the companies.

Re: Expanding Project Glasswing

#154

Post by mohamedkoubaa »

airstrike wrote: post #126

I'll share the first-hand account I recently got from someone else. > We've used it at work > it is... not as hype as everyone is concerned about > I'd argue the framework around it for security scanning is the arguably more useful side of the tool, definitely doesnt take a huge model to get all the issues it flagged on our systems > For us, it absolutely flooded us with noise > I mean hundreds if not thousands of fa…

In other words it is equivalent to spending a million dollars on an audit by a software security consulting company

Re: Expanding Project Glasswing

#155

Post by skybrian »

sandeepkd wrote: post #72
skybrian wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s true that providing security services to so many organizations will likely put them in a position to earn lots of money. It makes them an essential service, sort of like what happened with Cloudflare and denial-of-service attacks. (There are competitors, but they’re the first company people think of.) But I think that downplays the importance of having a good product. If the product didn’t work, this would be a…

This is a circular economy that makes everyone look good. Almost all of these enterprise companies are sitting on top of so much of tech debt that in any realistic scenario they cant really patch vulnerabilities if they are even in double digits. A lot of these companies would not even let their valuable enough code to be ingested by LLM's. At this phase no company would risk their brand by calling the product as ine…

Yes, it flips it from “don’t use a remote LLM on our code because security” to “we must run an LLM on our code because security.”

Re: Expanding Project Glasswing

#156

Post by thewebguyd »

bgilroy26 wrote: post #147
airstrike wrote: post #126

I'll share the first-hand account I recently got from someone else. > We've used it at work > it is... not as hype as everyone is concerned about > I'd argue the framework around it for security scanning is the arguably more useful side of the tool, definitely doesnt take a huge model to get all the issues it flagged on our systems > For us, it absolutely flooded us with noise > I mean hundreds if not thousands of fa…

It seems like there is a genuine communication breakdown between management and engineering. Engineers know that there are vulnerabilities all over the place and that there have been for ages and that where the rubber hits the road every vulnerability does not represent a successful exploit by some nefarious actor. Management can often treat cybersecurity like a black box that represents millions upon millions in lia…

It won't bring understanding though is the problem. You get situations like the parent, where the execs don't have the knowledge, time, or care to learn beyond "vulnerability bad, must patch now"

Execs/Management types getting extra visibility into the technical side, in my experience, has only ever resulted in additional but meaningless work, like just checking boxes on a compliance/audit checklist without actually considering the impacts of those changes, or whether a company is actually vulnerable to the disclosed CVE.

It's along the same lines of the BS I deal with day to day from upper management arguing back with "But ChatGPT said..." meanwhile pasting some hallucinated crap that doesn't even apply to our environment.

LLMs are basically a dunning-kruger machine for management. Engineering is best left alone and trusted to do what they are being paid to do.

Re: Expanding Project Glasswing

#157

Post by kspacewalk2 »

hasteg wrote: post #134
aliljet wrote: post #129

Is this just one giant marketing plot?

There's a lot of speculation that it is indeed a marketing plot and the model is just a step improvement over current capabilities... and the real reason they aren't releasing the model is they are compute constrained and cannot serve the model. To my knowledge there's no proof of this however, but given the fact that literally 60 days ago they made Mythos out to be the end of the world and last Friday they announced…

Their IPO is coming up soon. It would be interesting if Mythos remained mythical right up until then, wouldn't it?

Re: Expanding Project Glasswing

#158

Post by testfrequency »

atleastoptimal wrote: post #139
UltraSane wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All hype no substance.

Mythos was announced a few month ago and has been actually demoed in many companies who have all reported its abilities, supporting the claims made by Anthropic. How is this in any way similar to the FSD situation?

Tesla does* the same thing with “influencers”, close enough perhaps?

Everyone either doesn’t have access, or always has the “bad version” and the “trust me it’s 10x better” version is always Coming Soon™

Re: Expanding Project Glasswing

#159

Post by lgpartman »

mohamedkoubaa wrote: post #154
airstrike wrote: post #126

I'll share the first-hand account I recently got from someone else. > We've used it at work > it is... not as hype as everyone is concerned about > I'd argue the framework around it for security scanning is the arguably more useful side of the tool, definitely doesnt take a huge model to get all the issues it flagged on our systems > For us, it absolutely flooded us with noise > I mean hundreds if not thousands of fa…

In other words it is equivalent to spending a million dollars on an audit by a software security consulting company

Or to RedHat for rewriting Python core 500 times.

The "humans do it too" argument gets tiresome. Even if the consulting company fails, the money goes back to employees and back into the real economy. Now it goes to Don Amodei.

The consulting company could be local, which provides a higher degree of confidence, though not proof, that no data is exfiltrated to the US.

And so on.

Re: Expanding Project Glasswing

#160

Post by cyanydeez »

jb_briant wrote: post #84
cyanydeez wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>can't release it can't release it the plebs

Unsure about that, opus was already insanely good and we got it for a fractional cost via subscriptions. They want the plebs, they want the mass.

I don't think so bro; anthropic wants B2B cash.
Post reply on HN