Comment by empath75
6 hours ago
A lot of people thought that OpenAI was making this up, and I hope if you believed that, that you recalibrate your opinions of what LLM's are capable of. Working with Fable and Opus 5 all the time, absolutely none of this surprised me capability wise, except for what seems like the long term planning capability (probably enabled by long context windows and launching subagents?)
Very few think they made it up. Many think they set up a situation by disabling guardrails that would inevitably end up creating a newsworthy outcome.
Many people said in the original discussion that this was more of OpenAI’s marketing than a serious issue. I counted 89 “marketing”s and 19 “stunt”s.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48997548
Could still be 80% marketing.
These models are trained on cyber intrusion, that's literally what ExploitGym benchmark measures. That part should not surprise anyone.
But what if, say, OAI noticed the problem right away but Sam Altman recognised it would be a great PR and decided it should continue with increased compute budget?
2 replies →
Was HF in on it? They disabled their guardrails too, to please OpenAI? And as seen in the comments here, make many believe they are incompetent and have joke security?