[mmaunder]

“Each of the results cost roughly $100,000 in API cost to develop.”

And

“Over the course of a week, one Anthropic researcher worked together with Claude to develop the HAWK attack, and another researcher built a scaffold4 that allowed Claude to fully autonomously discover the AES attack.”

Spending $100k in tokens in a week is an impressive feat even with massive parallelization. I suspect the TPS their internal folks have access to is far higher than their bulk public endpoints.

There’s a tech aristocracy rapidly emerging in our society and it’s going to tear us apart.

[kmoser]

Today's state-of-the-art AI systems are the equivalent of late 1970s personal computers: bulky and expensive, but wildly more powerful than what came before. And look what happened: tech improved by orders of magnitude, and eventually computers were tiny and cheap.

I predict the same will happen with AI: certainly the latest and greatest will still command a steep price (yes, supercomputers are still a thing) but for most people who just need something reasonably fast and powerful, cheap (or free) AI will do the trick, especially when run locally.

So no, the aristocracy won't have a lock on the technology because tech is always being democratized. Until arbitrary computation itself is outlawed (and yes, I know, governments and industry are always inching us closer to that), we'll be ok.

[jrflo]

That's not really that ridiculous. Looking at my ChatGPT stats my biggest day of token usage was 1B tokens (seeing how far Sol Ultra could go on a difficult problem with a quantitative goal and eval harness that it could run on it's own that allowed it to keep going until it succeeded). I blew through my $100 subscription usage in that one day, but with a 80/20 token blend that's $10k in API billing. So, $70k in a week. With the higher cost of Mythos, that's not that crazy. It's more so a testament to how ridiculously marked up API tokens are, or how discounted subscriptions are (who knows which is true)

[ericpauley]

Is that including cache reads? It seems improbable that (a) you actually filled 1000 1M contexts and (b) OpenAI allowed that in a $100 subscription window.

[gbalduzzi]

How much was valuable the output you got during the day?

Is it at least comparable to the $10k of cost?

[ecshafer]

So $1-10k in Chinese model time, thus why we must ban them.

[heaney-555]

If a Chinese model can do it for $1-10K, then why hasn't one?

Why have all the mathematical (and now cryptographic) breakthroughs come from OpenAI and Anthropic?

Is it possibly because the Chinese models are so benchmaxxed they can't make novel discoveries?

[arcanemachiner]

They're a few months behind the frontier, which, by the way, only started making these discoveries in the last few months.

[throw10920]

That might be true, but it's irrelevant to the current discussion, which is arguing about whether or not Chinese models can do this now. One of the commentators above is arguing that it's not only possible but significantly cheaper (i.e. Chinese models are not only at par with frontier but several months ahead).

[arcanemachiner]

Ah, sorry, you're right. I would be willing to be that Kimi could do a decent job today, but definitely not for 1% of the price.

[nojs]

For one thing they are extremely GPU constrained due to export controls, so it’s unlikely a priority compared to training

[ozozozd]

“I haven’t seen X, therefore it doesn’t exist.”

Absence of evidence is not an evidence for absence of something.

[poidos]

Don't know if one has or not, but a lack of announcement is not a lack of success.

[mwigdahl]

Do you really think that if a Chinese model had achieved a significant math breakthrough that it wouldn't be trumpeted to the global media? The "Deepseek moment" was great for China; this would be the same.

[nozzlegear]

Perhaps since the Chinese companies don't have the economy of an entire global superpower riding on them, they can't afford to light $100k+ on fire doing random shit with the hope it'll turn out a research paper.