This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
This is already happening: https://www.anthropic.com/news/finance-agents
Already almost there if you include all Chinese companies, certainly will be by end of 2026: https://livebench.ai
I'm with you on this one. We've already seen movements in this direction (eg, not releasing Mythos).
And more targeted RLHF, but yes agreed on this. However, I think there is still a ton of yet-to-be tapped potential in tooling, context, and feedback that will have massive impacts even at current model capability.
Overall my timelines are shorter than yours but I do think there is a "ceiling" and I don't think we are at risk of Yudkowsy's takeover scenario. I do anticipate "mundane" surveillance and increased slopification. My hope is in local/opensource models running on ASICs, which would at least alleviate privacy and intentional kneecapping concerns.
Deepseek 4 pro blows Codex 5.3 out of the water in real world usage.
Which v4 pro are you using? It's terrible.
The deepseek one
The one that is way worse than codex 5.3?
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
I disagree with this bit, mostly because I've seen good arguments that the secrecy around Mythos is at least in part due to Anthropic hyping up their own work, but most importantly due to a massive compute crunch on their end. It does have legitimate security implications, of course, but their framing that the delayed release is mostly due to those concerns is, shall we say, a rather self-aggrandizing claim.
GPT 5.5 Pro performs as well or better on cyber security tasks, and it OAI was happy to do a general release. This is one of the rare occasions where I have to say that they were right in mocking Anthropic for poor excuses for their real issues, even if I genuinely prefer Anthropic as a company and the recent versions of Claude for many tasks.
That’s exactly what it is. Behind the marketing department though, there are still interesting things to see with Mythos.
Anthropic’s model is really good at finding software vulnerabilities, but so are other models. GPT-5.5, already generally available is comparable in it’s capability. The company Aisle also reproduced Anthropic’s published results with smaller, cheaper models.
One of the problems with Mythos is that it’s very expensive to run, and the company doesn’t appear to have the resources for a general release. (What better way to juice the company’s valuation than to hint at capabilities but not prove them, and then have others parrot their claims?)
Modern generative AI systems (not just Anthropic’s but OpenAI’s and other open-source models) are getting really good at finding and exploiting vulnerabilities. I don’t want to say I was a complete naysayer originally (because I wasn’t) but the rate of advancement has raised my eyebrow a few times along with some of the economizing factors.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link