‹ BackHN Continuity

Thread

OpenAI GPT–6 Astra breaks Enigma message that has resisted solution since 2005

738 points · 448 comments · sohkamyung

  1. tantalor · · focus · HN ↗
    Neat, but "did it entirely on its own" is incongruous with "developing the necessary Python and C++ software for an Enigma simulator".

    I'd start by asking how much of that generated software is novel, or easily found on the web? Then, how much of the breaking process was offloaded to that software? If Astra is just handing off tasks to another computer, then I'm not sure how much credit it deserves. Finally, it looks like Astra provided some useful insights which narrowed down the search. Were these insights cribbed from elsewhere?

    1. tehlike · · focus · HN ↗
      Why does any of this matter? Llm is a memory of knowledge, of course it got what it got based on prior work.

      It can code enigma simulator from the algorithm. That's not really a problem. Astra will send computing to programs, LLMs are not good at computing themselves, why is this a big deal?

    2. [deleted] · · focus · HN ↗

      [deleted]

    3. dazed_confused · · focus · HN ↗
      I'll just note that building an enigma simulator and/or code cracker is a common course project and there are several tutorials on doing so.
    4. sowbug · · focus · HN ↗
      Would you give much credit to someone who ignored a nearby hammer and pounded in a nail with his fist?
      1. goatlover · · focus · HN ↗
        I'd be impressed, followed by asking if they needed to go to the hospital.
    5. nonethewiser · · focus · HN ↗
      >I'd start by asking how much of that generated software is novel, or easily found on the web? Then, how much of the breaking process was offloaded to that software? If Astra is just handing off tasks to another computer, then I'm not sure how much credit it deserves. Finally, it looks like Astra provided some useful insights which narrowed down the search. Were these insights cribbed from elsewhere?

      Well were they? Short of you showing us the answer just sitting there or some tool that can already solve it I see no reason to believe this was the case. And the problem being out there unsolved for a long time implies it's not the case.

      And that's taking your concern at face value. It just seems incredibly pedantic to say it didn't solve the problem by itself because it created it's own tools to help solve it. Beyond that we could also fault it for not creating the GPU's it's running on.

    6. voiper1 · · focus · HN ↗
      It's a given now that LLMs are leveraging code to do things.

      "On it's own" generally means "not steered" or otherwise given professional guidance or input.

      I would say "developed the necessary software for a simulator" to be even more impressive - "here solve this problem" and "OK, but first I have to built the entire lab!"

      1. snthpy · · focus · HN ↗
        Indeed. It didn't write it's own TCP implementation either. Nor operating system, nor compiler, nor build its own wafer etcher...

        My comment probably sounds facetious but I'm actually intrigued by why we seem to view using the level immediately underneath as cheating whereas the levels below that are taken for granted?

      2. snthpy · · focus · HN ↗
        Why do we view using the level of abstraction immediately below as cheating while the levels below that are taken for granted?
    7. grantboy12 · · focus · HN ↗

      [dead]

    8. adrianmonk · · focus · HN ↗
      I took "on its own" to mean that it didn't need any additional prompting or guidance from the person sitting at the AI console. If so, then the originality of its work or the resources it used isn't the point. They're reporting that it did whatever it did without requiring supervision.
    9. CamperBob2 · · focus · HN ↗
      Neat, but "did it entirely on its own" is incongruous with "developing the necessary Python and C++ software for an Enigma simulator".

      Turing and Flowers: "How do you think we did it?"

    10. madaxe_again · · focus · HN ↗
      I mean, did it design the silicon? Mine the rare earths? Make an apple pie from scratch? No? Fraud.

      Also you appear to be using a computer to submit this comment rather than doing it manually, so can it really be said that you wrote it?

      1. snthpy · · focus · HN ↗
        Exactly!

        Why do we view using the level of abstraction immediately below as cheating while the levels below that are taken for granted?

    11. elicash · · focus · HN ↗
      "I baked this cake on my own from scratch!"

      "Oh?! You harvested and ground the wheat? You extracted the sugar? You laid the eggs?"

      1. pramsey · · focus · HN ↗
        Reminds me of the chicken sandwich... <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.theguardian.com&#x2F;lifeandstyle&#x2F;2015&#x2F;sep&#x2F;23&#x2F;1500-sandwich-from-scratch-andy-george-youtube-food-supply-chain" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.theguardian.com&#x2F;lifeandstyle&#x2F;2015&#x2F;sep&#x2F;23&#x2F;1500-sa...
    12. DoneWithAllThat · · focus · HN ↗
      This is a level of cope even I wouldn’t have thought reachable.
    13. stonedivot · · focus · HN ↗
      When someone writes a piece of software and uses &quot;#include ...&quot;, or &quot;import ...&quot;, etc, do you come to them and tell them they didn&#x27;t write the solution on their own?
Open on Hacker News to reply ↗

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.