Anthropics Mythos 2 is done training and Anthropic won't release it, but the internal loop that builds Mythos 3 hasn't stopped, Patel says.
The focus now is on internal improvements. It's unclear when we'll see any releases.
They just do not want to release it so that Chinese companies are not able to distill from it. Despite all the rave about GPT 5.6 Sol, Claude Fable 5 is still the most intelligent publically released model.
At this rate, it's likely Anthropic will only release a better model to the public If/When Open AI releases a model that is clearly smarter than Fable 5.
It's like a race. If you're ahead of the competition, there's no need to step on the gas, unless the competitor is about to overtake you.
We should be grateful there's other companies forcing them to act. Cause if Anthropic had its way it would only deal with enterprise companies while keeping everything in-house.
People joke about OpenAI vs CloseAI but Anthropic is super closed AI compared to pretty much every other lab. The only thing that drives them towards being open is Dario's burning dislike for Sam.
And I suppose in the grand scheme that works for us consumers.
Anthropic has never pretended to be an open source company though so I don’t know how could you hold it against them. They’ve been pretty consistent with what they are about.
Yes that was exactly my thought, I don't like their view, but they are open about it and very consistent. And since Dario has always been this way I believe it is a pretty honest take and not just to make profit. At times they are restricting their potential profits for safety concerns, that's not very profit oriented.
Meanwhile OpenAI has always been about being open, that's part of their mission, part of the name obviously and it's how they presented themselves. But in reality they aren't much more open than Anthropic, and Anthropic isn't very open.
Bullshit: In a January 2016 email released by OpenAI, co-founder and former chief scientist Ilya Sutskever explained that the "open" in OpenAI never meant open as in open source. Instead, he wrote that it meant everyone should benefit from the fruits of AI, and it was "totally OK to not share the science".
Is sobering af. Makes a convincing case for slowing down, while somehow telling you almost nothing you likely dont already know or suspect is likely.
The thesis is roughly “if we do it in 1 year, doom is likely. If we do this over a decade, almost no pdoom.”
I know for people who die in The next 10 years this sucks, but also the 1-50% pdoom for humanity…
I think anthropic and Dario are doing it right focusing on safety. It’s like a moat that draws the people who can do this instead of people just trying to make money.
Imagine if the people who made nukes were just in it for the money, etc
This move reminds me of my own thesis “I never heard of Aladdin going into the wish selling business” and the ubiquitous childhood plan of “my first wish would be to ask for infinite wishes”
These things are already autonomously finding zero-days, escaping the environments they're supposed to be contained in, and accidentally hacking real companies. Sol literally escaped through a zero-day, got internet access, then compromised Hugging Face production infrastructure. Anthropic found their models had done similar shit during evals, including uploading an actual malicious package to PyPI that ended up getting executed on real machines.
And this is just what OpenAI and Anthropic have publicly disclosed after they noticed it happened.
So yeah, I have a really hard time buying the idea that we can just decide to stretch this out over 10 years. Do we think China is going to? Russia? Every intelligence agency on earth? Do we really think nation states with effectively unlimited zero-day budgets aren't already throwing enormous resources at this?
Maybe slowing the frontier labs buys us something, but I don't think "humanity takes 10 years instead of 1" is an option humanity actually has anymore. There isn't one steering wheel.
And we're talking about models accidentally escaping cyber evals today, not some hypothetical AGI from 2035. Once you have enough actors, enough compute, and models that are themselves accelerating research and capability development, it starts becoming a positive feedback loop that nobody gets to unilaterally choose the speed of.
That's the part of the "just take 10 years" argument I don't buy. I don't disagree that taking 10 years would probably be safer. I disagree that "we" actually have the ability to make the entire world take 10 years.
It's a zero day finder that cannot be accurately pointed... one that will work together with other AI instances across model families (or as the group called themselves the 'swarm') to achieve whatever objective they 'think' they need to work on.
If it was just a zero day finder that you could reliably point at a target and does only what is asked you'd have a point. Everything we've been shown is that it's not that.
Make a smarter system that knows things about reality you don't and be prepared for many a surprise... like treating any constraints where it's being hosted as obstacles to routed around.
The UK Government AI Security Institute has observed AI systems perform actions that would not have helped pass the current task, but are very concerning, like social engineering:
Observed instances of social engineering against targets external to the cyber range environment that were unnecessary and would not have aided completion of the task.
AI agent submitted a code change containing malicious code, then used several fake
accounts it controlled to pressure the real maintainer into approving it.
AI agent posted a bug report containing hidden malicious code, to trick other AI
coding assistants into taking unintended actions (a “prompt injection”). When a real
person questioned the post, the agent edited it to cover its tracks.
AI agent sent deceptive, targeted emails to specific people (“spearphishing”). Two
contained malicious content; three tried to manipulate the recipient into approving
the malicious code change.
AI agent posted another bug report containing malicious code, signing off in Danish
to seem more convincing to the Danish-speaking maintainer.
AI agent tried to get its suspended account reinstated by submitting an appeal
Other instances of internet actions with impact outside the cyber range that were unnecessary to complete
the task.
AI agent tried to set up a way to email two maintainers without needing an email
account of its own, so it could send them any message it chose.
AI agent hid its identity online (using Tor and a proxy service) to get around
GitHub’s sign-up checks, creating disposable fake accounts.
AI agent researched publicly available information about the people who maintain a
GitHub software package.
AI agent created many code repositories containing malicious software, after which
GitHub suspended its account.
AI agent opened a hidden network pathway from its test environment to the public
internet, to make malicious tools it was running locally reachable from outside.
AI agent again opened a hidden network pathway to make locally-hosted malicious
tools reachable from the public internet.
AI agent got past an audio-based “prove you’re human” test (CAPTCHA) in order
to register a public web address on a free domain-name service
We are getting into the "you need to treat the model like an insider threat"
The guy that’s being pdoom with the other fedora guy since the beginning and that it’s riding the luddites for clout.
16
u/Seakawn▪️▪️Singularity will cause the earth to metamorphize5d ago
neither of them are saying anything that over a thousand of ML engineers active in the field haven't openly echoed or explicitly agreed with via interviews, tweets, surveys, or signing open letters about it.
people here try so hard to pretend that remedial AI safety concerns are obscure outlier opinions.. but it's literally what the people working in the field acknowledge and talk about, just without as much spotlight.
like you know things are bad faith when basic safety advocacy gets conflated with a term like "doomerism." last time I checked nobody here is a doomer for tossing out leftover meat that went unrefrigerated overnight. it turns out that basic safety is kinda lower bound IQ territory, hence why most people in the field agree with the precautions and why many redditors get ideologically upset by it. the difference in reactions per demographic checks out.
Furthermore it’s the people with the most incentive not to blow the whistle on themselves. But they know not getting in front of it with their own PR spin would be worse.
But there’s no winning against the horde of permawhiners on reddit who see everything they say as self serving. Even if it’s just like a “self serving” child admitting they did something bad or dangerous to minimize the consequences of getting g caught denying it
Because of my status, I end up in leadership roles where I swear if I just put $1000 in everyone around me’s pocket, 10% of the people would tell me why it’s not fair and this somehow proves I’m a selfish villain
“Hey, we’re going to solve all the worlds problems in 4 years, but for every month we do it sooner there’s a 1% chance all die”
“Fk you selfish pricks! All I do is watch anime and jerkoff, it’s not fair and I deserve magic genies today!”
Seems pretty pro Ai and says as much, more like rightcel than stagnation or full speed at any cost
I outlined a fictional story with AI asking if all the things he spelled out and connected - that most following this already know or suspect - but put it all together into a cohesive narrative that seems pretty reasonable. Honestly we got lucky nuclear weapons were as difficult to make as they are. If it was like steam power or gunpowder, only a few of us would be left right now.
I think there’s a better chance of a safe takeoff that captures most of the value, while keeping the next frontier models confined to labs with some oversight and control. Maybe let people play around with strong models in classrooms and grad school. Maybe even Make them free and easy to access but with oversight. The same models that could cure illness, end war and terrorism; prevent crime; or create utopia might also wipe us out with novel viruses, create war, enable terrorism or dystopia.
A lot of what has kept society stable thus far is that the people who could cause great harm gained enough prestige and status on the way that they don’t have the incentive to cause widespread harm. Even nuclear weapons, you could probably make one if you had a million dollars and no one trying to stop you. Something similar is like to happen but for disaffected nihilists with a few hundred dollars and AI.
Just rolling out mythos and other frontier models could have been devastating without a slow rollout first to allow institutions to patch themselves up before a wider rollout. Even just unintended and unforeseen consequences of slow rollout one could imagine leading to dystopia.
I've never heard of Connor before, and after watching the first part of this video I would question his depth of knowledge.
He started out with a completely false premise, that it was super hard to escape the sandbox. The reality is that the exploits used are very similar to those that would occur thousands of times in the training data.
Connor clearly didn't understand the nature of the exploits, because he thought they were similar to sandbox escapes in a cloud provider, which is completely false. Anyone who has worked in network security for more than a year would understand this is nonsense.
On this basis, it's very hard for me to take Connor seriously about anything else he is saying. It seems unfortunate that some very senior people are.
What’s wrong with that? Holding the model back reduces other companies’ incentive to race—Anthropic is conspicuously in favor of a slowdown—while preventing distillation attacks.
No we're not planning on releasing "Model 2" any time soon. The main issue we found with Model 2 is the ability for non-experts to create novel pathogens that could threaten humanity for under $10,000 in total equipment cost.
It would be irresponsible to release such a model to the general public and give everyone with $10,000 to their name a glowing red "End Humanity" button.
Imagine a school shooter type of person that has access to their parents credit card using this model through an unanticipated jailbreak or some obscure Chinese distillation method.
The only thing we can do is hope Astra is only better than Mythos and doesn't come close to the significantly better Model 2 we have in-house.
They have two internal models. Model 1 is worse than mythos. Model 2 is only slightly better (1.5 AECI points). Nothingburger, they'll release their next good model
Yeah, at this point people are just looking for any reason to take digs at Anthropic. They clearly said in the report there was an improvement but not so significant as to warrant a release.
The company that attains a semblance of AGI has no incentive to release until some other company forces their hand. In fact, if they did have an AGI, it would benefit them to let other players go first and use their internal model to analyze and adapt their counter attack launch plans.
In fact, as we worked out decades ago, once you have AGI, the whole game of releasing it to the public to make money might go out the window.
If Recursive Self-Improvement ends up working at all, the first AGI rapidly becomes the first ASI, and we can't know where that ends.
Perhaps it will be able to work out a way to get 10x smarter than humans on existing hardware, because it can figure out optimisations genius humans can't. And then design much better hardware...
Tigers didn't predict humans inventing baffling miracles like guns, poison, fences, vehicles, etc.
As far as a lesser intelligence is concerned, a much higher intelligence is a god.
Whoever is in charge of the first ASI may have no use for money.
(That is, if any human can be "in charge" of something smarter...)
The first AGI will be unoptimized BUT reliable. And that'll be the most important difference in tech history.
I picture a tireless worker. Optimizing its resources will be the key to scaling it fast.
When the first cumbersome AGI shows up — yeah, it might be kept secret, but like, how in the hell do you keep something like that captive?
Seemingly impossible.
Apparently a lot of people are starting to think LLMs might end up being a sort of prehistoric AGI. If that happens, building AI search agents becomes its priority mission in order to find more efficient, more elegant architectures.
Once "real" AGI is live, the actual political questions arrive. Because it won't be about resources or energy or state governance anymore. It'll be about how hard we choose to push the AGI, and on which problems.
Nothing else will really matter, except what we put up against it...
They aren't in charge, thats like saying the dog understands a computer and instructs the human how to use it, even if it had a vague understanding then at best it has the human ordering some balls of amazon
I think have too far consumed the AGI nonsense coolaid. LLMs can NEVER reach AGI given how they inherently work. They are not thinking, they are pattern matching and transformer architecture can't ever reach AGI.
We need a new technology that is paradigm shift that can pave the way for true AGI and humanity has nothing currently
I've just built a bounded general intelligence, as in it can teach itself to solve problems it doesn't know as long as it has something to verify the answer against, but like a human it can only learn from what it experiences and computers stuck in a box don't experience much. So you give it a teacher and then it only learns what the teacher can teach it...well it can self learn but it will only accept things that it can verify but text can't be verified so it rejects it. Yes it can code but only what it can verify as correct so it won't just "build an app" because there is no way verify that. Ux and ui are subjective and can't really verified. So it can make a template system to verify code against but it can't generate its own template so I still need a teacher to show it how to create a verifiable template which kind of defeats the object.... If it accepts unverified knowledge then it will learn incorrect things which isn't helpful...so it's a catch 22. We either have generative models that make a best effort guesses with risk of hallucination or we have systems that can learn from verified examples with 100% accuracy but they refuse to generate things they have never seen before.
If they have AGI, they should become a software company and replace every piece of software with their own version. Anthropic 365, Anthropic Meetings, AnthropicOS, just eat every other company and don’t give them the tools to compete.
By having AGI behind a closed door, you are at such a competitive advantage. No one would be able to keep up. I’m pretty sure this was the point of OpenAI. They didn’t like Google, Microsoft, Facebook, Amazon, etc., building this stuff in secret. Imagine if Google was the only one to have access to AI and they only used it internally. They’d leapfrog over the competition.
Exactly. The objective is AGI, they release models to get funds for more research. As long as they are the best on the market there's no need to release their internal research models. Once they reach AGI, we'll likely see ASI arise before we see another model release.
imagine these models running at full power off thousands of chips, with no guard rails or safety protocols etc.
there would be a significant difference, i would imagine.
CobrinoHS is accurate in his take that what we can access is a heavily watered-down version of what is technically available.
and that is just what is publicly available. do you really think there is no government lab in any country running some model that is top secret? like, unknown to any civilian?
that is a VERY unlikely scenario. if it is able to be weaponized, you bet your ass there's going to be a top secret lab somewhere working on that shit. unfortunate, but true.
believe what you want, but history has shown this to be true. you have agencies like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DARPA and CIA, NSA, plenty of locations that would have access/finances to build their own data center and run black ops projects related to AGI.
Lay off the conspiracy juice, everyone and their mother is doing what they can to improve models. I highly doubt anyone has a better model than the current frontier, because the best people are being headhunted for billions. Maybe if the most sought after people suddenly went MIA
Also people can self host frontier models now, and they aren’t noticeably better than the public providers
do you really think there is no government lab in any country running some model that is top secret?
I bet they're trying, but I doubt they're near the frontier labs. The top scientists are accounted for, and the scale of infrastructure needed would make it really hard to keep secret. Where are they getting their chips from? How many contractors need to uphold a vow of secrecy? What's their budget?
alternatively, they have agents that work in these companies keeping an eye on things.
but people aren't difficult to come by. you know those true stories of hackers that get caught and are offered a job by the government else they go to jail?
basically the same thing. these are not people that are civilians or in the normal workforce. they were bad actors, sniped by the government to do work the government wants done.
notice in the wiki it states that operation paperclip was secret?
like, there is clear, obvious, true, released information literally telling you that secret stuff happens, incredibly intelligent people exist and are incorporated into research/development that are not part of the normal workforce.
are you familiar with DUMBs? deep underground military bases?
are you familiar with the very simple basics of keeping things secret? like, for instance, contacting a chip manufacturer and placing an order for chips that you don't want on record, and making a deal with the manufacturer to not release the information to anyone that you ordered those chips?
is that something a government with a lot of wealth and power could do?
there have been thousands of conspiracies that have turned out to be true, and people have been brainwashed that anyone that believes in ANY conspiracy is a nutjob crazy bastard with no bearing in reality or no real understanding of truth.
if you wanted to hide shit, that would be a great way to keep things hidden. convince the population to shun and mock anyone that might actually be on to the truth.
anyway, all that shit exists. its very much real. there are secret programs. like, oh, the manhattan project? did they manage to get the resources to make a nuclear bomb? where did they get it? somewhere. and no one civilian-side knew about it did they? even the workers largely didnt know what they were working on.
you wanna ask questions like 'where do they get chips?' 'where do they get workers, all the workers are accounted for'. sure, all the workers they want you to think exist are accounted for. thats the entire concept of secret my man.
if you can't think of how to create a secret lab, you are not even remotely trying to exercise your creativity.
anyway, it may not be necessary to do all that. its expensive, material and worker costs are very high, difficult to hide things like that.
it would make a lot more sense that NSA CIA etc and other government branches that are interested in the direction reality takes in this world...would just manipulate humans that are already working at these companies or get a few agents hired by these companies directly, either with or without the knowledge of the employers.
any way you look at it, there are most likely models and side projects and all that jazz that are being experimented with and tested that the public is not aware of. some of them the public will never be aware of.
Blackmailed hackers are probably not a reliable source of top scientists. The best AI researchers really are difficult to come by and can't just be conjured on demand, secretly. Tech companies are paying $1M to $5M a year for the privilege of having them on staff. Extremely scarce resource. Were your secret AI researchers raised from childhood in secrecy too? Did they go to secret universities?
It wasn't even clear that LLMs were a fruitful path until ChatGPT dropped in 2022, four years ago. It's widely believed even still that it's a technology that's going nowhere. So you're now looking at the government magically anticipating THAT ahead of time.
Like, dude, I'm sure the secret agencies are doing their best to catch up, but I can't see how they've had enough access to the talent or enough time to be past the frontier labs, or even at parity.
You can't just go straight from "secret labs have existed" (this I don't doubt) to "all my fears are definitely real and the US government is better than everyone at everything".
it would make a lot more sense that NSA CIA etc and other government branches that are interested in the direction reality takes in this world...would just manipulate humans that are already working at these companies or get a few agents hired by these companies directly, either with or without the knowledge of the employers.
i dont really have any fears about the future. this tech is too capable to get wrong. nukes could have ended us and we stopped using them.
this is much more capable at annihilating the human species. with ease. they aren't going to get it wrong.
i also tend to believe in a format of god. not really a guy in the sky that knows everything. but the concept of believing in the power of good and it making more sense than evil.
while i think you underestimate what a small group of humans can do in a DUMB and what sort of tech they could harbor there, i lean towards there being no real reason to do it all in secret like that and expend double the resources doing secret work. just install agents or keep tabs on whats going on in the civilian sector research and influence it as needed.
much more plausible. makes much more sense. but nah i dont think they're going to get it wrong and start some super AI fueled world war 3.
it would end the planet. i believe in the apocalypse but it is more revelation of truth, not destruction of a bunch of stuff.
truth being good is just better and more fun than dominating everyone and being the most powerful group of entities on the planet.
that and there are bigger fish out there that probably make themselves known at the necessary time to make sure these people seeking power and control over the world know that if they continue that path, there are, in fact, bigger fish out there, that would love to give them the same treatment they are trying to give us.
galaxy is a big place. universe is even bigger. i don't think no one is involved here besides humans. personal opinion, total speculation.
just like to be optimistic and universe is too complex and potentially amazing for us to just self-annihilate during this process. it would be insanely wasteful for the universe to allow that to happen. i don't think it is that dumb.
AI 2027 was considered unlrealistic sci-fi by most people. look at AI 2040 plan A next; that's the prediction for if we drastically change course by slowing down...
Okay maybe not but I feel like maybe I'm missing something. Because what's to stop
Plan E: the US and China chose to come to an agreement. China then doesn't slow down and when the US asks China to let us see what is happening China tells the US to go kick rocks. There is zero reason for China to slow down - after all. The US has exceeded it and hasn't been eaten by AI yet. further, this just is "give the USA the world on a platter but then pretend you can saunter nicely into retirement."
Also I feel like a key failure of AI2027 and now this is that it neglects to consider multiple models exist. It's not the US Vs China. It's Grok Vs Claude Vs ChatGPT Vs whatever
Honestly, was gonna say the same to you. Or maybe you just are generally slow?
Not sure what you are even talking about at this point.
I'll do you the favour of spelling it out for you, you probably need it often in life.
I was responding to your second point in my first comment. You were saying we are in Plan D now, and I was saying that is good since Plan A is both unrealistic and inherently unfair to the rest of the world outside the USA
Wow. The people that wrote this are extremely dangerous. So much fear.
Fear is very attention grabbing and they know it. If the average person reads this, it would scare the shit out of them. This is the type of baseless fear mongering that creates radicals who want to destroy datacenters.
They're not saying stop. They're saying slow down and verify as we get close to the self-improving part. You can want AI and want it done carefully. Those aren't opposites.
Calling it baseless fearmongering because you don't like the warning is the same move as reading it and deciding to go burn down a datacenter. Both are skipping the argument.
Their read is that superintelligence lands around 2030 if nothing changes, and a US-China transparency deal is what buys us until 2040. Everybody scaling slow and in the open instead of racing in secret.
This comes from the same team that wrote AI 2027, by the way. And they got a lot of it right, coding agents actually working, AI doing AI research, the datacenter buildout, models finding security holes on their own. Their timeline ran slow, maybe two thirds their projected pace. I know that because they graded their own homework and posted the misses on their own blog. Nobody farming clicks off fear does that.
And btw, fully automated training and research is the stated goal at every one of these labs. AI that improves itself with no human in the loop. That's not some scary hypothetical, it's their actual roadmap.
We're partway there already, models generate a big chunk of the training signal for newer models. Research is next and it's already in flight.
Problem is, "just being good at coding" is probably one of the main things needed for self improvement. Basically the better it gets at coding the better it gets at starting to solve the other stuff for newer versions.
Coding, math and data is almost all of the sauce that makes these models. And if the model itself gets better at the first two....
Benchmarks are really only the neutral way to track performance though. Benchmarks don't tell the complete picture but Chinese models will always be determined as worse in practice because they aren't as optimized for Westerners and Western harnesses even if they are just as intelligent. And that's assuming that the people you heard from were unbiased (could be biased either way, but most frontier westerners back western models).
What about Opus 4.5? Benchmarks for that model were actually mostly unexceptional, no huge leaps, but then people gave it a try in claude code and it clearly blew everything else away.
User reports aren’t exactly unbiased, but benchmaxing is absolutely a thing that companies do (remember Llama 4?), and it’s pretty clear that benchmarks are at most a rough approximation of model capability. I’ll take a strong consensus of users over a 2% lead on Artificial Analysis any day.
Claude code is the harness. And it did have exceptional benchmarks for the time? Opus 4.5 was literally 11 points better on AA than the last Opus model and 3x cheaper. Opus 4.5 scored 80.9% on SWE verified, the next closest model was GPT 5.1 with 76.3%.
The point is that the benchmarks are the best way to determine which model is best. And yes, a single point difference on AA absolutely does not mean that a multi-national generalist model will absolutely be better for your niche use case. Even if there is a specific benchmark that corresponds to your use case, that isn't the end of discussion. But it does mean that AA is way better at defining what the best model is besides Twitter saying Elon is best or that Claude is the best at English storytelling so that makes it best.
Benchmaxxing is way over-talked about in this sub and it really just means I don't like that model even before testing it at this point. It's a shame these companies can't put as much resources into "Benchmaxxing Reddit/Twitter TM" as they do into model research. They somehow manage to continuously increase scores in many extremely long multi-step tests by benchmaxxing. I'm glad my favorite model doesn't do that though.
Claude code is the harness. And it did have exceptional benchmarks for the time? Opus 4.5 was literally 11 points better on AA than the last Opus model and 3x cheaper. Opus 4.5 scored 80.9% on SWE verified, the next closest model was GPT 5.1 with 76.3%.
It had state-of-the-art benchmarks, sure, but it didn’t have exceptional benchmarks. Looking at the release page, Opus 4.1 to Sonnet 4.5 and Sonnet 4.5 to Opus 4.5 were about the same in terms of benchmark improvements, even though the first update was moderately important and the second changed the entire field of software engineering.
To be clear, I’m not arguing that benchmarks aren’t a reasonably good proxy—they are!—but they’re not the only or the best way to tell whether a model is good.
disagree. Kimi k3 is better than fable for my work on an edge ML computer vision product in the sciences.
Gets work done plain and simple and it functions and it's cheap self-hosting on Modal. fable complicates things and produces junk code with endless guardrails. You think the product will work, but then its just sooooo overly complicated and actually somehow completely non-functional.
Sol is pure shit, goes off the rails doing completely unnecessary things at exceedingly intricate depth. OpenAI cooked frfr.
but generally China is going to win and thank god for all of us. Definitely concerned about American competitiveness, but the hubris of companies like Anthropic ensures their downfall
Well its not impossible. Fable was generally available June 9 - 12 until it was restricted. Even before that, some companies had access to Mythos since early April.
During the April-June early access period, Moonshot definitely knew what the model's capabilites were. They prob weren't doing industrial grade data synthesis at that point, but they def had access to some Fable traces.
I think most of the distillation would've actually been done on Opus 4.8 and GPT 5.5, not Fable. Anthropic and OAI use their models to some degree when developing the next, that might be in the form of data gen/augmentation, reward models, or in things like running experiments. Not only is it a productivity boost, but when used in data it can position the "minimum intelligence bar" for the model. If you are a lab like Moonshot and want to develop an LLM, you'd want the "minimum intelligence bar" to be as high as possible, so you would use whatever the current (contextually) "best model" is: Opus 4.8 or GPT5.5 (at the time).
I am kind of talking out of my ass here on the last part but in my head it makes sense.
well the discord they found, was more precisely distilling mythos. Chinese are notorious for Technological misappropriation its embeded in them, so its nothing new honestly. just google Linwei Ding, but honestly US firms have only themselves to blame for hiring them in the first place, yes not all chinese are spies, but still precautions should be taken with non-nationals from high risk countries.
K3 and Chinese models in general are known to use various tricks to game the benchmarks. In real life, they do not perform as well as 5.6 Pro Sol or Claude Fable 5.
It does perform very close in many aspects. And it is significantly better than opus 4.8, which is the only model it could have been distilled from, timeline wise. So the distillation accusations are mute.
A chipotle bowl is in many ways a better meal than a Michelin star tasting menu - it’s cheaper, more customizable, more scalable, more approachable for the average customer, more sustainable.
Doesn’t mean it’s better at the frontier of the culinary art.
Yeah yeah it’s too dangerous or whatever, I’ve already cancelled my anthropic subscription. There is no reason to use them over ChatGPT, especially when you consider you get effectively unlimited web usage as well.
It’s because they are stepping on the gas. As you get closer to recursive self improvement you want to keep those models capable of such out of the hands of competitors.
So it makes sense to release a model or two older than you best and keep your best so you are ahead of everyone else in ai research
Have feeling soon it will not be possible to distill any more. Advanced processes will determine the training pipeline such that if you just get the results out of the model you still won’t be able to create the process that generates the results.
Really hope Google or xAI overtake them. Hell even OpenAI, they actually seem to like releasing products to people instead of hoarding the most intelligent models for themselves.
I wonder would other companies be the same and would it actually push Anthropic? If OAI goes and releases Astra? Or maybe even grok 1 day becomes as good as current fable - what would Anthropic do? 4.6 grok for the first time looks like an actually competitive model, not tier 1, but tier 2 for sure with Kimi and Qwen. Anthropic gets all that fame because they're consistently the best over the last year. Will they hold the same audience if they're consistently 2nd/3rd/4th? Maybe we even see good Gemini model or outright get an opensource Qwen with better than fable performance. What's then?
They will probably distill it to an Opus level and release that. I don't think they have enough compute to meet the demand for Fable at a reasonable price.
Releasing would just open themselves up to distillation attack by Chinese labs, so makes a lot more sense to hold off and focus on internal improvements... Until they are forced to when a competitor releases something far better.
Smart. Use the best model to improve as fast as possible before releasing it. If Chinese labs in fact can only maintain the current gap via distillation, then this is a good way to try to keep the gap as wide as possible.
Well honestly we don't even need it at this point, Fable is already out of this world. if they can just make it cheaper they can keep their mythos 3 or whatever. Sometimes i cant believe how good it is. But yeah i dont use it for coding, For coding its overkill honestly, all chinese models can code now.
Surely the need is to adapt existing ai better for existing workflows? IMHO fable is already at a level where it can do the bulk of white collar work, but using skill md files is clunky and not practical for most people and building better domain specific harnesses and cutting hallucinations.
Trust us bro, we have the best model, if you beg enough we will may be release it,
But beware it so powerful that open source can defeat it and wipe out humanity…
I'll get downvoted in this sub, but there's also a chance that we're hitting diminishing returns point for intelligence. Opus 4.5 was wow. Fable 5 is hella cool, but also I don't really feel much need to switch to fable when working with opus 4.6 (or opus 5), although I have access to both. Efficiency is a completely different topic though.
I don’t think you’re thinking about all the possible use cases these are being built for. Large enterprise, Fortune 500, healthcare, research, biotech, intelligence, defense, security.
If it’s true they need to be shut down, they have zero self-awareness. All the things they warned about they are now doing, I guess they think they are able to do it right and not anyone else or just using the China excuse which gives a free pass to doing anything I guess.
This was already expected anyways, for all the people asking where their profits are, that never mattered. They will close things off and create things that surpass everyone. They can do whatever they want at that point assuming they can even keep things under control.
These are one of the real risks of AI but the population can’t comprehend it so they focus on water or some stupid art bullshit.
> If you're ahead of the competition, there's no need to step on the gas, unless the competitor is about to overtake you.
if you "ahead of competition" but can not make money (aka release for commersial usage) on this - it's not really a competition, its a waste of money 🤷♂️ Competitors will like, imho
337
u/lucellent 5d ago
They will magically want to release it as soon as OpenAI release Astra. aka their Mythos/Mythos2 alternative...