mukmuk

Related report:

Security firm finds China-linked AI agent behind Japan cyberattacks https://english.kyodonews.net/articles/-/88761

As soon as I hit the “At [current company name], we...” part of a blog post, I sigh a bit.

Rooting for them but doesn’t look very Porsche to me.

Lightly related, here’s the design patent for the original Targa design:

https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/75/54/b6/382d342...

“Pacing the frontier” sounds smarmy and weird, like the phrase was generated by Claude itself

This specific analysis seems to have some basic problems, but I think a lot of us sense a degree of coordination here culminating in Dario’s letter.

If you were to work backward from “we need to lower training costs so that we can go public and make trillions” then you might come up with a plan similar to what we have seen.

Updated. Had been trying not to make it overlong.

Specifically for tax evasion related to an addiction to playing poker with billionaires.

> “He is not wealthy enough to sustain the losses of the billionaires he has played against, and he is not good enough at poker to win at the rate of professionals,” they wrote.

Tobey Maguire was among the witnesses. He had hired Goldstein to help collect a $7.8 million poker debt from billionaire Andy Beal.

> “No,” someone who works with the prompts said when asked if they think ChatGPT users know that humans are reading their chats. “I don’t think they would imagine some contractor somewhere [...] is analyzing the conversations.”

> 404 Media asked OpenAI if it had explicitly told users that humans may review their prompts in order to improve ChatGPT’s responses, and if so, to point to where this disclosure is. OpenAI did not answer this question.

Why was this flagged?!

Can one of the undoubtedly many meta employees reading this comment section speculate on why this happened?

I have tried to understand what evidence Lonsdale’s Cicero Institute uses to support its homelessness model legislation. My provisional conclusion is that they are working backward from undermining the Housing First approach. I base this on their misinterpretation of statistics on mental illness & substance abuse in [1]; and their misuse of statistically insignificant mortality differences in [2].

[1] https://homelessness.ucsf.edu/resources/press-release/ucsf-b...

[2] https://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/publication/104501...

The attorneys who did this were Carmen Ortiz, Stephen P. Heymann, and Scott Garland. To their everlasting shame.

It has become a little hard for me to get past landing pages that read as slop. There are only so many hours in a day. Maybe it would be useful for Show HN submitters to indicate whether the link is something they built themselves.

See also: “Bellevue house at center of OnlyFans trafficking case” https://www.axios.com/local/seattle/2026/06/09/bellevue-huma...

The current link is a cheap aggregation of the actual reporting by 404 Media:

https://www.404media.co/software-giant-sap-stops-most-travel...

Anytime a company/group announces some random new project now, I tend to immediately suspect over-reliance on AI. From what I’ve seen, AI addiction frequently manifests as an explosion in scope, possibly because LLMs make so much initial “progress” on new projects which you can then demo and have resource allocators extrapolate to some glorious shipping version. But then you have to go back & clean up the slop, progress slows to a crawl, and it’s all way less exciting. That initial rush can be addicting. Ultimately a supercharged version of eternal human impulses I guess.

fwiw, Gemini 3.5 has identified itself to me as an OpenAI product on multiple occasions.

I held my nose through the first third of the winning entry before giving up. Unbearable. Those metaphors… yeesh. Reminded me of this brutally fair minded attempt to read Shy Girl, the AI slop ‘horror novel’ Hachette pulled from shelves in disgrace:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GbeKTa5xhZo

The number of realists on this site is encouraging.

I’m not sure how to reconcile anthropic’s update / some of the exuberant comments here with recent feedback like the following from curl maintainer Daniel Steinberg:

“I see no evidence that this setup [Mythos] finds issues to any particular higher or more advanced degree than the other tools have done before Mythos. Maybe this model is a little bit better, but even if it is, it is not better to a degree that seems to make a significant dent in code analyzing.”

https://daniel.haxx.se/blog/2026/05/11/mythos-finds-a-curl-v...

Isn’t this illegal?

From my experience, LLM performance in these areas is being massively oversold. I have repeatedly tried using Claude to modify a range of models typical of investment banking / private equity / sellside research contexts, and the results have been generally disastrous. On multiple occasions, the xlsx would no longer open.

Our country is currently enforcing a blockade that is murdering children in Cuba. It is all so sickening.