this post was submitted on 08 Apr 2026
236 points (84.3% liked)

Technology

83600 readers
4275 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] PushButton@lemmy.world 139 points 1 day ago (2 children)

ChatGPT-2 is too dangerous in 2019.

The lack of creativity in this marketing is disappointing...

[–] mlg@lemmy.world 3 points 17 hours ago

Hah I actually remembered this too, and people were still hyping Elon Musk at the time as well.

TBF the researchers knew what they had could be scaled into something gamebreaking which is how we got ChatGPT-3, but OpenAI made it sound like they already had it nailed down several years before it actually blew up. I think their unreleased examples they gave were a newspaper and short story written by AI which they said was indistinguishable from human material.

[–] emb@lemmy.world 27 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

They didn't entirely miss the mark there. They publicly released the version after that and the world became worse. That certainly fits for some definition of 'dangerous', even tho it's probably not how they were thinking.

[–] NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Ya, they were pretty spot on IMO.

[–] quips@slrpnk.net 3 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 12 hours ago)

And really anthropic is making a very narrow claim:

Mystic is so good at finding bugs that it poses a danger to critical digital infrastructure.

That is not that outlandish a claim. The model is 10-15x more expensive more expensive to run than other flagship models, and if anthropic is being truthful (which is a big if, I’d like to see what they are finding), finding critical vulnerabilities like its nothing.

Makes total sense to stage the rollout privately first so critical infrastructure can be secured before these models are generally available to any attacker.

But I fucking hate their stupid marketing.