Comment by HyperL0gi
4 days ago
Isn’t it just hilarious that a model that seemed so superior to Fable but didn't get doomsay marketing from Anthropic got released without any issues? In theory, this was supposed to be AGI level according to Anthropic, yet here we are, just a normal Friday.
Go read the safeguards section in the report and you will realize why that is.
These models are heavily as safeguarded and that was the initial reason why they said they couldn't and haven't released Mythos because that model is the one without the safeguards.
OpenAI is did the same thing when they announced a model without safeguards broken into HuggingFace servers.
Yes, this makes a lot of sense, but it’s just very amusing to see. 2 months ago, the world was about to end, now not so much.
7+ years ago GPT2 couldn’t be released because it was deemed too dangerous[0]. It was, of course, eventually released.
0: https://openai.com/index/better-language-models/
4 replies →
I realized it a why back these labs are selling hype.
since then I have never cared about models except those that affect money in my pocket e.g AWS Nova Sonic
Have you been patching your systems for the past two months? It was crazy even if you completely forget the supply chain literal FUBARs and you must’ve been living under a rock to not see OpenAI (accidentally) pwning hugging face
> now not so much
OpenAI Huggingface breach begs to differ
Do you have an example of the "doomsday marketing" you're referring to?
3 replies →
feels almost like anthropic is desperate for ipo huh
i think we'll see one of the fastest deflations in history post anthropic/oai ipo
2 replies →
I feel like i've seen less hype about "the next model will be agi". GPT-6 is supposed to be coming this summer, and nobody is expecting AGI now. Not sure how they're going to keep the hype cycle going
Or another way to see it is that current models are AGI as it was defined before, and the goal post is being moved.
they are definitely not agi as it was ever defined. they’re only a bit more capable than they were a year ago. they crossed over from interesting crap to useful tool recently but really only for software
13 replies →
LLM labs dumbed down the definition of AGI as much as possible, yet their models haven't reached it still. We are nowhere near the original definition of AGI. Not even 1% of the way there.
6 replies →
Yes 18 months ago it seemed like AGI was being promised every other week, and now I don't see any of those headlines.
It's already happened but no one wants to admit it
We can start having this conversation when it's able to do at least 20% of the work that I have to do.
Fable established the frontier, this is just catching up.
So unless doomsday actually happens then you're unhappy with the warning - is that right? You see false promises of apocalypse as marketing?
It’s either advertising, or they’re idiots, because the apocalypse keeps not happening. Either way, it’s not worth listening to them.
Exxon: "The exceptionally explosive refinery beside your house has not exploded because of our safety culture and protection protocols"
Emp: "what a bunch of lies, I bet they don't even do anything over there"
My point is why the sudden change in tone? I’m not dismissing the models’ capabilities.
As they explicitly say, Opus 5 is ~ equally capable as Mythos/Fable at finding vulnerabilities, but it is much less capable at exploiting those vulnerabilities on it's own. That is an extremely meaningful difference and to me completely explains the difference in tone, release style etc.