alt Hacker NewsMy bet is that Mythos is still over-hyped and the cybersecurity fear and guardrails are mostly marketing to force company partnerships through Glasswing and get public attention.
Replies
The UK gov disagrees with you:
https://arstechnica.com/ai/2026/04/uk-govs-mythos-ai-tests-h...
https://www.aisi.gov.uk/blog/our-evaluation-of-claude-mythos...
Bingo.
"We had to do extra work to make this safe because it's so advanced and dangerous..." how many times can they trot out that line before it loses its effect entirely?
It worked for OpenAI when GPT 3 was deemed too dangerous to be released. This is just a spin of that.
Yes, and "in collaboration with the U.S. Government" feels like a very gross ploy at appeal to authority. You don't need Mythos or really any SotA frontier model to make malware or do extensive penetration testing/reconnaissance already. Sure, Mythos might be faster/more efficient, but the cat has been out of the bag for awhile. Even the terminology "infrastructure providers" practically screams "Enterprise leads".
I think all models can find vulnerabilities if read the entire code base. Or intelligently combine parts of the codebase. Especially with test loops.
I know a security researcher at Google with access to Mythos. He says it's the "real deal" and that "there are career plans I had that are no longer viable".
I fear it's a smokescreen to manage cost and capacity.
And to ensure that only USG-approved entities are allowed to secure their code.
Mythos is from the same guy who did "GPT-2 is too dangerous to release"
https://naokishibuya.github.io/blog/2022-12-30-gpt-2-2019/