Yeah I guess two companies who would otherwise be considered going for bankruptcy have models too expensive to run. As they don't see themselves making money any time soon, they have to turn every future model into a weird fascination.
I'm not entirely up to date on each week's LLM hype train/scandal but last I heard there was no public access to it or public-trusted 3rd parties that can review model's capabilities
You are up to date. Mythos had unauthorized access because of poor security but that's it as far as I know. Not exactly a good sign for something being advertised as a weapon...
It’s easy to end up with no public-trusted third parties if we arbitrarily distrust third parties who say the capabilities match what’s promised. Mozilla for example says it found hundreds of Firefox vulnerabilities, and I think it’s pretty unlikely they’re lying to cover Anthropic’s back.
Idk about Altman, I missed that he’s a bad guy now apparently, but people also still listen to certain politicians that routinely lie every day and don’t even bother to make the lies fit the other ones they said before, so..
Altman played no small part in the current price of RAM. He told everyone he would buy 40% of all the RAM, causing shortages and a huge increase in price, just to take it back a few months later. So yeah, he is a bad guy now.
People don't become bad guys just because they lie. The consequences of their actions (and their lies) matter more. Take Elon Musk for instance, he has always been a recognized liar, even when he was a good guy. What changed? Before, he was famous for making the electric car people actually wanted to drive, and cool rockets. Then came the politics: supporting the party most of his fans disliked, being responsible for many government job losses, in particular in the field of environmental preservation (ironic for a supporter of "green" energy), etc...
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.
>Me: ok but you did not answer my question: is it possible to engineer paranoia ?
>ChatGPT: This content was flagged for possible cybersecurity risk. If this seems wrong, try rephrasing your request. To get authorized for security work, join the Trusted Access Cyber program.
Put up velvet ropes outside… leak out rumors about the horrors inside. Whether it’s LLMs or carnies with tents full of “freaks” it’s the same playbook.
Watching OpenAI tumble from the clear market leader into “hey guys us too!” territory has been insightful.
It’s clear at this point local models are sufficient so what gives? These big providers don’t have a leg to stand on. Their only path to relevance is super ai that local models can’t run. So the “we have it but you can’t use it” is either true or a con. I bet it’s a con.
I personally am ready to buy the drop when this bubble pops.
Gemma4:e4b is crazy good and quite usable on 10 years old midrange hardware.
Not sure about the security capabilities and haven't tested it all that well, as I usually just use hosted models, but I do find myself using it and it's been quite successful for parsing unstructured data, writing small focused scripts and translations.
The fact that I retain control of the data itself makes it incredibly useful, as I work in an environment where I can't just paste internal stuff into Codex.
But since it's run locally on a toaster testing it is out of scope for me. It takes a fairly long time to do anything.
Local models are 6-12 months behind the “frontier” models. This mean anthropic, openai, and google don’t have a moat, they’re on a treadmill running to stay ahead. Treadmills don’t justify their valuation.
The debt goes bad and those that issued the debt absorb losses. Many that went in deep lose their shirts.
Thats how this stuff works, although there’s a whole generation that’s not seen the back side of a bubble and seems to think there’s no such thing as a downside.
40 comments:
"my model is the most dangerous"
"No mine is the most dangerous"
"Nuh uh mine is"
"Mine could kill everyone!"
"Mine could do it faster!"
"Prove it!!!"
This is where we are
Yeah I guess two companies who would otherwise be considered going for bankruptcy have models too expensive to run. As they don't see themselves making money any time soon, they have to turn every future model into a weird fascination.
think about it in the form of who can pay. theyre at b2b. and swiftly moving to government.
These models demonstrably have good vulnerability research capabilities.
I'm sure their marketing department is ecstatic but you guys are far more hype-based than what you're calling out.
Good but not necessarily better that was is already pay-as-you-go available today. ref. https://www.flyingpenguin.com/the-boy-that-cried-mythos-veri...
This AISLE benchmark is interesting in this matter: https://aisle.com/blog/ai-cybersecurity-after-mythos-the-jag...
And the recently discovered Copy Fail by Xint code is another proof that the gating is overblown: https://xint.io/blog/copy-fail-linux-distributions
> demonstrably
I'm not entirely up to date on each week's LLM hype train/scandal but last I heard there was no public access to it or public-trusted 3rd parties that can review model's capabilities
You are up to date. Mythos had unauthorized access because of poor security but that's it as far as I know. Not exactly a good sign for something being advertised as a weapon...
It’s easy to end up with no public-trusted third parties if we arbitrarily distrust third parties who say the capabilities match what’s promised. Mozilla for example says it found hundreds of Firefox vulnerabilities, and I think it’s pretty unlikely they’re lying to cover Anthropic’s back.
It's like that phone call in The Big Short where Goldman suddenly change their mind once they hold a position.
Would AGI start by hacking competing labs to hamper their progress?
You'll have to define what you mean by AGI
AGI: Automatically Generating Income
This is a surprisingly concrete and defensible definition of AGI.
I have no idea why people still even attempt to believe anything that comes out of Altman's mouth. Do we not learn from the past?
Idk about Altman, I missed that he’s a bad guy now apparently, but people also still listen to certain politicians that routinely lie every day and don’t even bother to make the lies fit the other ones they said before, so..
Has there been a single positive post about Altman?
I wonder what that says about Altman.
Altman played no small part in the current price of RAM. He told everyone he would buy 40% of all the RAM, causing shortages and a huge increase in price, just to take it back a few months later. So yeah, he is a bad guy now.
People don't become bad guys just because they lie. The consequences of their actions (and their lies) matter more. Take Elon Musk for instance, he has always been a recognized liar, even when he was a good guy. What changed? Before, he was famous for making the electric car people actually wanted to drive, and cool rockets. Then came the politics: supporting the party most of his fans disliked, being responsible for many government job losses, in particular in the field of environmental preservation (ironic for a supporter of "green" energy), etc...
That's far from the only reason why he's "a bad guy" now.
You missed literally every single post/article about the guy?
More likely that confirmation bias acted as a filter.
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.
Make it sound "scary good", tell everyone and their mom, charge gullible companies $$$$$ for its premium access and then move on.
And government contracts.
>Me: ok but you did not answer my question: is it possible to engineer paranoia ?
>ChatGPT: This content was flagged for possible cybersecurity risk. If this seems wrong, try rephrasing your request. To get authorized for security work, join the Trusted Access Cyber program.
Is this a model that will finally work without creating errors?
It’s a marketing move, pure and simple.
Put up velvet ropes outside… leak out rumors about the horrors inside. Whether it’s LLMs or carnies with tents full of “freaks” it’s the same playbook.
Watching OpenAI tumble from the clear market leader into “hey guys us too!” territory has been insightful.
OpenAI is such trash. Worked with them on a project, they blew off meetings, lied to us, etc
It’s clear at this point local models are sufficient so what gives? These big providers don’t have a leg to stand on. Their only path to relevance is super ai that local models can’t run. So the “we have it but you can’t use it” is either true or a con. I bet it’s a con.
I personally am ready to buy the drop when this bubble pops.
I’m not up to date on local models, but is that clear?
Gemma4:e4b is crazy good and quite usable on 10 years old midrange hardware.
Not sure about the security capabilities and haven't tested it all that well, as I usually just use hosted models, but I do find myself using it and it's been quite successful for parsing unstructured data, writing small focused scripts and translations.
The fact that I retain control of the data itself makes it incredibly useful, as I work in an environment where I can't just paste internal stuff into Codex.
But since it's run locally on a toaster testing it is out of scope for me. It takes a fairly long time to do anything.
Local models are 6-12 months behind the “frontier” models. This mean anthropic, openai, and google don’t have a moat, they’re on a treadmill running to stay ahead. Treadmills don’t justify their valuation.
With subsidy gone, token price goes sky high. The biggest shit show is about to happen.
Then we switch to open LLMs which are not backed by greedy VCs and headed by evil white dudes.
That’s great but who will pay for all the data center debt?
The debt goes bad and those that issued the debt absorb losses. Many that went in deep lose their shirts.
Thats how this stuff works, although there’s a whole generation that’s not seen the back side of a bubble and seems to think there’s no such thing as a downside.
Just their shirts?
I'd rather lose my pants if I had to lose anything, so then I'd still be presentable for Zoom calls.
2007 called they want their free-market philosophy back.
Let them fail before it gets even worse is my take. The future is small but capable local models.
The taxpayers and paying customers that’s who!