Comment by Davidzheng
2 days ago
This is certainly not a planned marketing stunt. I hope this line of discourse ends soon--it wasn't the case for Mythos either.
2 days ago
This is certainly not a planned marketing stunt. I hope this line of discourse ends soon--it wasn't the case for Mythos either.
Wishful thinking, sadly.
By now, I'm pretty confident that some people would keep screeching "it's just a marketing stunt, AI capabilities and AI risks aren't real, they're just doing this to prop up their stocks" even if they find a Cyberdyne Systems T-800 armed with a shotgun breaking down their front door.
"It's a marketing stunt" is just denial trying to look like it's being clever.
If you ever worked in IT consultancy you would know its not a stunt, but its not impressive either.
F500 companies software is like switz cheese when it comes to security.
It was often a strategic decision to „release anything fast now, worry later”.
Ppl abusing AI will find those holes now but we all know there will be „zero” actions taken on it. Too many managers, CEOs, CTOs, higher-ups would be forced to take responsibility. This will simply not happen.
It did not happen, wont happen now and most likely wont happen in the future.
Haven't worked in consultancy specifically, but I've seen enough "internal use" corpo software to echo your "swiss cheese" sentiment. That a solid cybersecurity AI can find exploitable holes in it just isn't surprising.
People who never worked with corporate software written by underqualified, underpaid and overworked developers often have some incredibly inflated code quality expectations. An average open source project has code that's ten times as neat and a hundred times as battle tested as what's common in tooling inside corporate perimeters.
As a rule of thumb for this kind of corporate code: assume the software was written by a drunk developer at 3am, and you wouldn't be too far off.
All the more reason to mock the braindead "it's all marketing". There's no magic in a year 2026 agentic AI being able to traverse poorly secured corporate networks.
Can you clarify what you mean that Mythos wasn't a marketing stunt?
From my vantage point, it was an incremental improvement with no fundamental architectural change over contemporary frontier models that has subsequently been surpassed by other, incrementally better models. Saying it was "too good" for public consumption was arbitrary, and also barely different from what Anthropic have been saying about every model they've put out for years.
It's now public again, trivially easy to jailbreak for random researchers let alone states, and there is no evidence of a cybersecurity apocalypse on the horizon.
> This is certainly not a planned marketing stunt
Evidence?
The "Tech Bros" have shown such a lack of moral fiber and ethics the burden of proof is on you