91–100 of 142 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
your choices are to pay up or shut down. Another choice is to switch to a different model, perhaps open source this time.
Another choice is to write code and learn. Especially if you are 16 and have all day.
For pete's sake stop with the thinkpeices already.. its only been an week and the model isnt even out yet!!!!! OMG this generation - we can't separete the outrage from reality anymore. Meanwhile 3000 people have died arbitrarily in Iran War -while we navel gaze.
A bronze sculpture unveiled in March 2026 in Almaty, Kazakhstan (near the Europe/Asia border region), honors strangers who formed a human chain to save a dog from the Sayran Reservoir in 2016. The statue, located along the canal embankment, symbolizes unity and collective action after the 2016 viral rescue.
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.
Let’s say the model is indeed groundbreaking but needs much more compute that they have, I wonder would merging Anthropic and OpenAI be on the table.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Probably not. "This model is too powerful for the public" can also be interpreted another way, which they've also strongly hinted at - the cost/benefit ratio of the upgrade is negative for the vast majority of all users. Finding vulnerabilities is one of the few cases where it makes sense to use it. Their writing about the model so far does say this is an issue where, for instance, you can't really use Mythos for int…
If the model isn’t worth the cost for those who might want to make use of it, then it can’t be that impactful either. One thing to compare to would be what’s been paid for bug bounties in the past.
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.
Probably not. "This model is too powerful for the public" can also be interpreted another way, which they've also strongly hinted at - the cost/benefit ratio of the upgrade is negative for the vast majority of all users. Finding vulnerabilities is one of the few cases where it makes sense to use it. Their writing about the model so far does say this is an issue where, for instance, you can't really use Mythos for int…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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…
your choices are to pay up or shut down. Another choice is to switch to a different model, perhaps open source this time.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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…
I can't run my business without electricity. Yet we don't fear of its access being revoked. Sam makes the comparison of intelligence to electricity a lot. So we are on the path to these systems becoming utilities.
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.
Anthropic was born out of the idea that they feel paternity over humanity. They believe by limiting access they are performing a necessary pillar of security in multiple facets.
I think it's up to the public, and articles like this are part of the public's voice, whether this belief is serious or not and secondarily whether it's okay to even posture this kind of belief since it inherently results in marginalizing the many and rewards an already very successful few.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The point is it won’t be if these new models stay locked to the public.
You can’t use your own brain?
I don’t agree with vibe coding, I see the appeal of an AI ticking through my code at night to see if tests could be better or I missed something, etc.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If the model isn’t worth the cost for those who might want to make use of it, then it can’t be that impactful either. One thing to compare to would be what’s been paid for bug bounties in the past.
Bug bounties don't reflect the market impact of the vulnerability though, just the amount needed to incentivize white hats to do research they wouldn't otherwise (or that they would target to other platforms that pay higher bounties). You need to look at market prices for zero days on the black market to get closer.