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

71–80 of 142 posts

Re: The Closing of the Frontier

#71

Post by margalabargala »

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #19
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.

I feel like "this model is too powerful for the general public" was really just the equivalent of responsible disclosure, with the "too powerful" bit just a positive marketing spin like you say. That is, Mythos will make it much easier to find lurking zero days, so just like responsible disclosure requires a security researcher to notify the software author first and give them some time to patch, giving critical infr…

That's how I'm reading this too. They've made a (much) better metasploit/shodan all in one.

If you make a better vulnerability scanner and find a bunch of vulnerabilites, you should try to get them fixed before making all the results public.

Re: The Closing of the Frontier

#72

Post by layer8 »

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.

You can do things without AI. That hasn’t really changed.

Re: The Closing of the Frontier

#73

Post by enejej »

OldGreenYodaGPT wrote: post #7

The problem is Anthropic doesn't have the compute to deploy this model to scale to everyone yet. Dario didn't believe that they needed as much compute, OpenAI is going to have much more compute unlocked this year and especially next year.

So? They could basically open up an auction for bidding on compute with mythos.. that’s what you do with a scarce resource. I’m sure many large enterprises would be willing to pay a lot to have first dibs.

There’s a whole lot of traffic they are servicing that comes at a cost with no revenue in return. Why would you choose to forgo potential revenue for this?

Re: The Closing of the Frontier

#74

Post by justsomehnguy »

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.

Re-read the last paragraph of TFA.

Re: The Closing of the Frontier

#76

Post by SV_BubbleTime »

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.

>The “this model is too powerful for the general public” sounds like marketing to me.

Is no one else suspicious that they literally called it mythos?

Re: The Closing of the Frontier

#77

Post by amarant »

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.

Yup, this whole thing is quite typical for my generations attempts at activism: they always end up as marketing pawns for the very thing they set out to stop.

This whole "this model is too dangerous" ploy originated from (in my opinion severely misguided) activists who wanted to stop or slow AI development down as much as possible, spreading outlandish Doomsday scenarios wherever they could.

These online-first activists have always been a key driver of the success of the very thing they fight. They share the offending thing among themselves, making it go viral in process, and soon baiting these groups is the best marketing imaginable.

There were some rather interesting studies made on the subject around 2011, I particularly remember one made by Swedish jeans brand cheap Monday, but i can't find it now.

Re: The Closing of the Frontier

#78

Post by cgh »

andyfilms1 wrote: post #36
Ancalagon wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

It has always baffled me how quickly, and how voraciously, people started to rely on privately owned AI systems. AI is not something discovered by scientists and plucked out of the ether. It's engineered and controlled, for profit, by corporations which have demographics and KPIs. These companies don't owe you anything, and they make no promises. If you're running a business that deeply relies on AI, you might as wel…

The same corporations that insist upon private Maven repositories to control all code dependencies are nevertheless fine with establishing a massive dependency on a privately-held corporation in order to write software that hardly anyone in the organization understands. When I really think about this and how it plays out in the long run, I feel like I’m taking crazy pills.

Re: The Closing of the Frontier

#79

Post by docheinestages »

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.

> The “this model is too powerful for the general public” sounds like marketing to me

I tend to agree here. Anthropic has built a reputation and now they are in a position where they can claim to have a model way more powerful than it might actually be, and by limiting its access, there won't be an independent way to test it. I'm not denying that it's not smarter than Opus, but probably it's somewhat exaggerated.

Re: The Closing of the Frontier

#80

Post by notpachet »

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".

They could just be writing for themselves, or their friends, or for people with the patience to read. You are making assumptions about how badly they want to reach your particular eyeballs. They might not care about trying to win over people with a minimal attention span as much as you think they do.

What makes you think your comment was worth reading?

Post reply on HN