World News
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF OCTOBER 19 2025
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
view the rest of the comments
FTFY
I COMPLETELY agree with you. Except in this one case it's possible the problem is that the billionaires made an AI that understands how billionaires exploit financial systems and fear others could do the same with Mythos leading to actual legislation that would close the loop holes they spent decades creating within international finance legislation.
I know it’s cool to be blasé about AI stuff, but if there’s an area where the hype is warranted it’s computer security research.
I don’t want to look at AI “art” or read an AI generated “book”, but the exploits derived from an AI-enabled process work just as well as the organic version. And you don’t need a warehouse full of Eastern European zoomers and junk food to get them.
Are you certain about that? Anthropic has a team of security engineers "validating" the LLM output, and then they have been passing on their "validated" outputs to third-party security researchers to "confirm" them.
Tellingly, they don't say how many false positives have to be filtered through in order to find the correct vulnerabilities with working exploits, but I imagine that if all those security researchers were tasked with auditing the same codebases, they would probably find the same (or more) vulnerabilities without the shotgun guessing of an LLM to guide them.
You need to remember that these claims are being made by a company that has enormous financial incentive to make everyone believe that this model is a huge breakthrough.
I have no inside knowledge on this particular work, but their previous work on the OSS-fuzz targets and on Firefox were all excellent quality bug reports.
Seriously. Look them up.
They were all reproducible ways to trigger faults in ASan builds. That’s by definition memory corruption. We can argue about whether all of them are exploitable, but a) they need to get fixed regardless b) we know that even tiny memory corruptions can often be leveraged into a compromise given enough effort.
The question isnt how good the results are, its whether you can achieve the same quality for the money without an llm.
The stories of the bsd bug say they spent $20k on compute alone (and who knows if thats before or after VC subsidies). Then they had so many reports they need to pay some of the top experts to triage which ones were real.
And the result? no remote code execution, no data theft. A remote crash. Its a real bug that can cause problems but its not actually an exploit.
The sad thing is there really could be something new and useful in ai model security, people are seeing good results by automating the reproduction step, but the presentation of it as too dangerous to release and a massive change just sound like pure marketing.
Most likely its just too expensive to do this unless youre a vc funded op with its own compute and want a pr campaign to stop people thinking about how shit the source code you just accidentally released is.
Obviously Antropic has no incentive to keep the token counts low. My understanding of their strategy is that they are betting on models getting better faster than what would justify the effort needed to squeeze more value per dollar out of them. Obviously I have no data to contradict them, but I would be surprised if that’s the case in the long term and for everyone.
My guess is that the costs can be reduced substantially, but that’s only going to happen once these tools get into the hands of your average security researcher.
Yes of course they were. Professional security researchers tend to produce professional, high quality reports.
My comment was not generalized AI snark, it was specific to Claude Mythos.
At least according to Ed Zitron, the reason Mythos is not being released to general public is simply that it's too fucking expensive to run.
And all of the vulnerabilities it found, were found by other less expensive models already.
This scare tactic PR strategy is pure marketing hype for Anthropic, that's it.
Again, according to Ed.
Maybe time will show that I was wrong to trust Ed's reporting more than AI "tech leaders", but until that time comes, I know who I lean towards believing more.