[drawnwren]

In the absence of information, maybe it’s better to ask which claim is more extraordinary.

That,

A. Anthropic solved the llm jailbreak problem with mythos (despite no claim to have done so on their part)

B. That a full jailbreak of mythos is possible.

[vlovich123]

That’s not what the claim is though.

Anthropic’s claims are as follows if you read their post:

* this is not a universal jailbreak method

* the jailbreak affords you the same capabilities you get already with other models, not Mythos.

In this situation it’s which party do you trust more and history would suggest this administration is very playful with the truth, especially when it comes to economically damaging the company that’s become their political enemy

[sigmarule]

There is not an absence of information.

There is information, from Anthropic, concerning the jailbreaks that motivated this action, that directly contradicts the statement.

There is just an absence of information backing the statement I responded to.

I find it so odd this is apparently so contentious a take.

[drawnwren]

The existence of a jailbreak free llm in 2026 is extremely contentious to me. You can argue about the specifics of this exact jailbreak, but generally pliny and amazon both reported mythos jailbreaks in <7 days. It seems very reasonable to expect that a well funded state actor could achieve better results given significantly more funding, determination and most importantly unfettered access.

[s1artibartfast]

Nobody here is claiming fable is jailbreak free. Not anthropic and not in this thread. This was known before launch. The question remains one of degree and capabilities.

[drawnwren]

Yeah, if you're arguing that "this, according to anthropic, existentially dangerous model has only had its safeguards partially circumvented so we shouldn't step in" ... it's hard for me to take you seriously?

Put another way, the thing we are all concerned with is the complete circumvention of safeguards that is normally possible with llms. If you _aren't_ arguing that this isn't possible, you're not engaging in discussing the the thing that is concerning to regulators or those discussing the regulation.

[s1artibartfast]

Im pointing out what is the argument. You were saying it is something different.

Now you add the word "complete". Anthropic IS arguing _complete_ circumventing is NOT possible.

[linkregister]

A disappointing trend is to frame the opposing argument in extreme terms rather than engaging with the substance of the assertion.

The latter portion is grand standing about how incredulous the commenter is that someone might trust an LLM company about the strength of their harnesses' if-then-else statements for request routing.

Why bother with an unsubstantial comment?