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

The Closing of the Frontier

tanyaverma.sh

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 142 posts

Re: The Closing of the Frontier

#41

Post by walterbell »

wyc wrote: post #8

> A 16-year-old with no credentials and no capital could just do things. The world of bits offered the freedom to build without being drowned in arbitrary constraints, in a way that didn’t require assembling vast capital or prestige or connections, where your creativity and work could speak for itself, and you had agency. This is now truer than it ever was.

> your creativity and work could speak for itself

Including speaking to humans/bots with more resources to monetize said work.

> you had agency

Distribution is also helpful for revenue generation.

Re: The Closing of the Frontier

#43

Post by operatingthetan »

atleastoptimal wrote: post #39

I think we are going to look at the era between 2019-2025 as a very rare blip in the history of public AI access. Regardless of whether fears about Mythos end up being justified, the clear trend is 1. AI models are becoming better and better at causing massively disruptive effects, leaving up larger and larger liabilities, especially as laws and regulations are being passed/proposed which would put the responsibility…

> AI models are becoming better and better at causing massively disruptive effects

Anthropic chose to use their model to find a bunch of vulnerabilities. People have used much smaller models since to find the same issues. We are being set up to have certain pre-concieved notions about this model.

Ripping away AI access from the public at this point would be catastrophic for the world economy. It's just not happening.

Re: The Closing of the Frontier

#44

Post by avaer »

Ancalagon wrote: post #12
wyc wrote: post #8

> A 16-year-old with no credentials and no capital could just do things. The world of bits offered the freedom to build without being drowned in arbitrary constraints, in a way that didn’t require assembling vast capital or prestige or connections, where your creativity and work could speak for itself, and you had agency. This is now truer than it ever was.

The point is it won’t be if these new models stay locked to the public.

Whatever is in Mythos will be open source in 6mos-1yr tops. You might not have the GPUs but you won't be locked out of the capability.

We're still not at the point where one person with a coding agent can max out their salary in effectively using credits, so the capability is still well within reach of the vast base of the industry.

Meaning that for now, most people who want to pay for the product (which IMO is pretty reasonably priced for what it does) will be able to get the product.

The economics will make sure of that. The market is ripe for someone basically copying the likes of Mythos and pricing it competitively.

Re: The Closing of the Frontier

#45

Post by skybrian »

It's long been conventional wisdom that you shouldn't write your own crypto libraries - leave that to experts. But excellent open source libraries are available, which do get reviewed by experts. And if you're willing to study, maybe you can learn enough about cryptography to become one of the experts?

I'm wondering what other security-sensitive software that might become true of in the era of Mythos-or-better AI's?

There will still be open source projects that anyone could learn enough to contribute to, but maybe starting from scratch and writing your own becomes less feasible if you aren't attracting enough attention to get attention from people with access to the best AI's?

For example, Linux patches are going to get expert reviews, but maybe your homegrown OS won't?

Re: The Closing of the Frontier

#46

Post by operatingthetan »

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #26
airza wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

if an 1800 word post is just too long I think you are cooked. This is the nicest thing I can say on the subject.

It's not that 1800 words is too long, it's that I've seen probably 40-50 (at least) posts, analyses, and bloviations about Mythos since it came out. If the author doesn't very quickly get to why I should read their particular 1800 words over the other similar and competing tens of thousands of words on the subject, they are "cooked".

Open gemini chrome sidebar, type "sum." Watch the magic happen.

Re: The Closing of the Frontier

#47

Post by operatingthetan »

jabedude wrote: post #14
cortesoft wrote: post #6

This feels really premature. The announcement was a week ago. The “this model is too powerful for the general public” sounds like marketing to me. Give it a few months and it will be just another model they are selling, but the NEWER model is just too powerful for the public.

This happened before with GPT-2 being touted as "too dangerous to release"[0] at the time by OpenAI. I don't think that means every model will be safe to release in the future, but nothing I've read about Mythos seems like it's going to be different this time. [0]: https://openai.com/index/better-language-models/

It's going to be a slightly better Opus. Every model released by any provider since 4o has been a modest improvement but over-hyped. Opus 4.6 included.

I believe they are starting to split hairs and the primary lever left is adding compute.

Re: The Closing of the Frontier

#48

Post by tim-projects »

Anthropic should provide a specific service where they attack a businesses infrastructure using this frontier model and then issue a report of all vulnerabilities found. I could imagine it would be quite lucrative.

Much better than hiding it away where it can't help anyone.

Re: The Closing of the Frontier

#50

Post by cmxch »

fwipsy wrote: post #23
cortesoft wrote: post #6

This feels really premature. The announcement was a week ago. The “this model is too powerful for the general public” sounds like marketing to me. Give it a few months and it will be just another model they are selling, but the NEWER model is just too powerful for the public.

Security researchers always having a model one generation newer than the general public would still achieve the stated goals.

Which helps none, since that gates behind established actors.
Post reply on HN