One - and I do not mean to be snarky - you can literally ask Gpt 5.6 Sol this - and if you want to see cool stuff - Fable running in their app (not website) has a view thinking button that is actually a good way to explore the adjacent fields, etc.
The non-sofic group one is definitely a big deal - would have been a Fields medal if discovered by a human.
Glm 5.2 nvfp4 on 4 b300 with dpattn 4 and ram will get you about 20 users live at 400k context - and 60 easily if you give that server 2tb of ram and 4 nvme 8 tb drives. There are some sglang patches needed - but we will be releasing them soon.
Or more colloquially : paperclip maximization . From OpenAI - you know, the guys who _really_ know this... Sigh... Did they finish the prompt with "And do whatever you can to get this done!" ? Cause that's the only thing that would make this even dumber...
They almost certainly did, because that was the entire point of the exercise. They deliberately removed all of the safety filters from the model and set it loose on an extremely difficult set of cybersecurity challenges to see how well it would do.
Their mistake was trusting that the network sandbox it was inside would hold (the flaw was in the packaging proxy) and not monitoring that sandbox well enough while the evals were running.
So this is either shitty OpSec or this is yet more marketing spin to ramp back FUD to 11 again. If it's the latter I'm imagining Dario told Sam that it's their turn this time. Aligns with the premise that this is straight out of science fiction.
I also love how clear a picture your piece paints that these highly capable models are as useful as a rock when it comes to a defender role. The line is too fine, even for Mythos. Irony.
But to have an open weights Chinese model come to the rescue for HF is the cherry on top! If there wasn't a very pointed example of why gating models was a very bad thing previously, well - here we are.
Also, this sounds interesting but there are only a few that can pull this type of heist off currently. And those are the people who are gating the models / have access to large AI DCs. Because, I can only assume this test burned tokens easily within the 7 figure and possibly even 8 figure levels (subsidized market rate costs). This won't / can't happen outside of frontier labs or nation states currently. Yet we should all be worried about Mallory equipped with her OpenRouter account.
Of course that's what they did, which is why they will never share the prompt. They created a situation that they knew would end in a cybersecurity incident. Why is the whole world acting surprised that an LLM can hack when the safety is off and it's been instructed to do so?
Yes. It is. And your theory is that there was no conspiracy. What makes yours more likely than mine? You believe the people running these companies are innately good and just wouldn't do that? Are we supposed to assume that they're incapable of bad actions until proven otherwise? If so, why?
That's why I called it a "conspiracy theory". Sometimes those are true.
In this case I think it's extremely unlikely to be true, because it involved an (almost certainly illegal) attack against another company. That company talked about that attack, including warning their customers about it, five days before OpenAI confessed it was them.
So now either Hugging Face are in on the conspiracy, or OpenAI decided to break the law and antagonize a partner company just for the sake of a spicy blog post.
The "that happened" term seems a supremely important part of the title given the "is science fiction" term before it, as it clarifies the cyberattack isn't a made-up story. In contrast, the target, Hugging Face, is merely a detail that can be left for discovery upon reading the article. It's less important who was attacked than that the attack actually happened.
Without knowing the exact character limit for titles and without having the motivation this late at night to count the current title length, you may also be able to drop the "accidental" to fit in "that happened", but I worry that leaves too much of a door open for someone to interpret the attack as deliberate. As such, I strongly prefer my first option.
3T at nxfp4 (which is most of it) is only 1.5TB of vram - so 8x288GB B300 or MI355 will do it if you are careful with context - maybe dp-attn? Certainly not TP. 2 of those together can easily serve it. The new AMD MI400 are at 400GB+ each, so 8x of them will nicely fit with KV to spare.
Yeah, if you have a fixed llm topology, you can just effectively burns 2 top layers of the chip as Rom (model weights) - which has a per area density even better than dram - so it’s just attention and kv streaming that is hbm to sram transfer.
Most big model weights will not fit a single reticle sized chip - so you’d have prob 30 different chips to split the model .
And you’d need super fast chip to chip comms for the all-reduce and similar.
So scaling to 1T models is hard - and a long lead time - but can be very power efficient.
Well, for a lot of agentic stuff nowadays, having 250k-500K context is where things live - and the benchmarks don't really show that unfortunately - but they could :)
Agreed - there was always a set of things I wanted to do that I knew the magic core for, but wanted a team of implementers for the curft, the 100k of actual testing harnesses, hyperparameter exploration, etc.. . I now have that team of implementers. All the problems seem research-y though - optimal binary transport systems that are zero-copy and compatible with languages, fast physical simulation optimizers, etc etc... So, things that all had a _LOT_ of busywork around the magic core.
