I love Hank Green's video but his AI videos are always a miss.
this post was submitted on 11 Apr 2026
13 points (76.0% liked)
Videos
18706 readers
99 users here now
For sharing interesting videos from around the Web!
Rules
- Videos only (aside from meta posts flagged with [META])
- Follow the global Mastodon.World rules and the Lemmy.World TOS while posting and commenting.
- Don't be a jerk
- No advertising
- No political videos, post those to !politicalvideos@lemmy.world instead.
- Avoid clickbait titles. (Tip: Use dearrow)
- Link directly to the video source and not for example an embedded video in an article or tracked sharing link.
- Duplicate posts may be removed
- AI generated content must be tagged with "[AI] …" ^Discussion^
Note: bans may apply to both !videos@lemmy.world and !politicalvideos@lemmy.world
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
What do you dislike about them? I tend to be a bit more skeptical of it's progress than him, but I feel like it's good to hear a different perspective. I also like that he gets guests with more knowledge about the topic to bring some more expertise while he acts as a proxy for the average viewer to make it more understandable for a general audience.
zero day vulnerability is not a vulnerability that was never used. zero day vulnerability is a vulnerability that has not been fixed/patched yet so it can be used to attack an up to date software
Yeah, it's supposed to be read as "vulnerability known to the vendor for zero days"
What are you, some kind of Sith? Pfft. Hank Green is a gawdamned treasure. 🤌🏼😂
Disappointed this is about AI and not actual myth
I'm always a little picky with AI news, so I'm curious how much is actually confirmed to be true. I only did a little bit of digging, but it seems that all of Mythos' capabilities are simply claimed by Anthropic and not verified? I also couldn't find information about any new vulnerabilities they say it managed to find, it only found already discovered and patched ones as far as I can tell...?
The claim seems to be that it found them looking at old unpatched code and without connection to the internet and without being "explicitly" trained to find them. To me this sound like it was implicitly trained to find them since they were known about at the time of training, but I don't know this for sure. It sure does feel a lot like marketing and very little like facts at this time!
In their paper, they post keys that can be verified once the vulnerabilities are patched (so they aren't just revealing exploitable issues to the world) but in the few that they demonstrated (ones that were quickly patched), it demonstrated a pretty sophisticated ability to find and exploit multiple vulnerabilities. The patches that you saw them mention are a direct result of Anthropic reporting those vulnerabilities.
The method they talk about is basically saying that they weren't looking at old, patched code (which would mean that the model could have found vulnerability mentions on the web that others have pointed out) but rather current, actively used software. The vulnerabilities and exploits that the model found were novel, zero day (meaning as of yet they 'undiscovered' problems by the person/people being attacked).
I'm not a researcher though, so someone can correct any information I've gotten wrong here, but this is definitely not solely hype. It's not exciting stuff (unless you just look at headlines) but the vulnerabilities they discovered are like actual problems, especially if a model like this gets into the hands of bad actors.
Ah thanks, I didn't find their paper but you lead me on the correct path to find some nice info on their blog! Great idea with the keys they had, it's good that we will be able to verify if their claims are true in the future at least. The bugs that were solved already did indeed seem cool, but they write the blog in a slightly odd day where I didn't find the confirmation that those were also zero-day vulnerabilities. Either way, we should get plenty of confirmation with the keys. Thanks for the details!
Only about halfway through this, but it's an interesting conversation about Mythos and software security. Glad to see Hank hitting this because I think quite a few people were like me and saw that Mythos report and immediately thought 'hype-othetical marketing'.
I ended up reading their paper quite a bit later than the first articles started raising the flags about it, but only because a buddy pointed out one of the examples they discussed and it kinda blew my mind.