Birbla

Join the discussion

Write your take first — we'll ask for email only when you're ready to publish.

Sign in
  • Hacker News
  • Would love to see the benchmark comparison between Mythos / Fable and GPT-5.5-Cyber
    by GL26
  • Is it only my feeling, that the US government rolled back the Fable release, because they wanted their guy to get to the market before Anthropic?
    by kstkrv
  • No one commenting on the fact that oAI is releasing a Claude Mythos-class model - with apparent 0 restrictions or concerns by the US government, while Anthropic's (their competitor) model has been pulled weeks prior by the administration for 'security' reasons.

    It certainly has nothing to do with openAI's co-founders donating to the current administrations election fund, are actively supporting the DoW war efforts of autonomous weapons and also otherwise being ideology tightly coupled with the current US government.

    by mentalgear
  • I see a lot of knee-jerk comments to this, but I highly recommend running a scan ( https://openai.com/daybreak/codex-security-plugin/#codex-cli ) in your projects so you can evaluate it yourself. It found a real security issue in a project of mine, with very few false-positives.

    Its built-in resume mechanism didn't work after it crashed when running out of my 5 hour session limit, but Claude Code was easily able to resume it 5 hours later reading the session logs and https://openai.com/codex/security/scan.sh

    by Recursing
  • "trusted defenders" sounds really Orwellian. Reminds me of EU's "trusted flaggers": https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/policies/trusted-fl...

    I don't trust any of these people. Meanwhile I'm paying ChatGPT and Claude and can't use their top-tier levels because they assume I'm some security risk/terrorist.

    Local AI is our only hope.

    by jasonvorhe
  • I read this news as white noise because there is no scenario in which I will be allowed access to this model. First, I happen to be a citizen of a country that is not the USA. What's more shocking is that I'm not even located in the US. Thus in the eyes of OpenAI I do not exist in regard to SOTA security models. Second, I will never ever do KYC with a company that provides text transformation services*. Third, even if I did, I will not be able to pass KYC because the typical KYC requirements are strictly tailored to a certain subset of the world's population and lifestyle choices, tuned by Americans according to their world view. Fourth, even if I pass KYC, my account will be banned by OpenAI immediately on the first prompt because they have close to 1B users and couldn't care less about any single one of them.

    (*) which are nothing short of amazing and are changing the world, there's no doubt about that.

    by egorfine
  • Ok so why I don’t have access to this if I already pay for the max plan? Should I pay a security researcher to run codex on my code? Is this how it is supposed to work? Let’s hope we get some real cyber models that people can actually use from the Chinese without the stupid application forms.
    by theplumber
  • I don't know what the solution to this is, but I find it somewhat unfair that I pay money to Anthropic, and I pay money to OpenAI, and neither of them will let me use their best models for securing the software I work on.

    Admittedly Opus 4.8 xhigh does a good job, but are my customers not entitled to have more security from a Fable/Mythos or GPT-5.5-Cyber audit over the codebase? Or I guess the inverse question: why aren't they allowed that audit?

    (Fable/Mythos being unavailable notwithstanding.)

    It seems OpenAI will at least let me do this narrowly, at greater cost, by using one of their partners. But I already pay them money!

    by taspeotis

Explore Birbla archives