Thread

1. ghoshbishakh · 1790620028 · focus · HN ↗

   So sonnet is better than Fable now? That Fable which was too dangerous to release? I am so confused now.

   1. pebbly_bread · 1790623274 · focus · HN ↗

      Mythos is what they thought was too dangerous to release, fable was what they made after they worked on cybersecurity detection. As they say in the notes, this version of sonnet now has a similar screening process

      1. rs_rs_rs_rs_rs · 1790626778 · focus · HN ↗

         Mythos and Fable are the same llm. Fable has an extra tool that's in front of it that decides to accept the promp or not.

         1. dbbk · 1790627466 · focus · HN ↗

            Hence why it is no longer dangerous, yes

            1. emil-lp · 1790633972 · focus · HN ↗

               If you consider security through obscurity a safe route, yes

               1. usef- · 1790637353 · focus · HN ↗

                  How is this security through obscurity?

                  That term is about hiding a system's design in order to secure something, rather than having robust defences.

                  1. emil-lp · 1790657850 · focus · HN ↗

                     You answered your own question!

                     1. usef- · 1790658090 · focus · HN ↗

                        This is not relying on a hidden design.

                        1. emil-lp · 1790664941 · focus · HN ↗

                           The design allows users to bypass the security by luck and chance.

                           A secure system is impenetrable unless you have the key.

                           1. stravant · 1790674400 · focus · HN ↗

                              That's not how it works.

                              The reason you see "dumb" refusals that "should clearly be allowed" is that they're using more traditional deterministic methods to deny prompts rather than just relying in the stochastic LLM which you could bypass by luck.

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.