Hacker News Reader

Comment by virgildotcodes | Hacker News Reader

OpenAI and Anthropic need to just go ahead and give people access to the cyber models.

Otherwise we have a world of attackers using open and closed source models against a much smaller group of maintainers that are likely heavily dependent on Anthropic and OpenAI and for whom it may not be a simple matter to just get approval to start using the open model flavor of the month.

View on HN

Not only attackers. I have to switch to Kimi or GLM even in cases of basic issue triage on my own projects! Current guardrails are ridiculous.

I've been building a harness for security work, and had to switch to GPT 5.5 when even Opus started refusing security work. Then 5.6 Sol arrived, and it refuses security work, too. So, I switched to Kimi K3 and DeepSeek for API testing just because it's so much cheaper. But, if GLM is better, I'm here for it, as I think GLM is also cheaper than K3.

Mind sharing a link?

At least OpenAI seems to want to do that, but the US is now forcing them to go through approvals. Anthropic seems much more hesitant.

OpenAI seems to understand that these guardrails hurt the good guys. This is why they released Daybreak Blue, which is a step in the right direction (but the model itself is weak as it's just Sol with fewer guardrails). Anthropic seems to believe that harming defenders is worth it if it means they can achieve regulatory capture. They do a lot of mental gymnastics to try to pretend that this is not actually what they are doing. As a result they have lost a lot of customer goodwill, which hasn't yet caught up with them yet, but absolutely will IMO.

They won't. People will notice that the models are overhyped once they can test them.

The existing ones definitely are, so you know they're bullshitting.

Can't the maintainers use the same models as the attackers?

The maintainers don't need approval to use GLM.

They may need approval from their employers.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com