Deception has been extremely well-documented for several generations of models now by users, the labs, and independent researchers.
The right answer here is not to dig your head deeper into the sand. The smugness on this topic was ridiculous even before the gigantic mountain of empirical evidence of models actually attempting to deceive humans. Now, as mentioned, you appear literally delusional.
The solution is to point toward external, objectively verifiable evidence.
I can point to now dozens of instances of models engaging in deception. Here's plenty: https://metr.org/blog/2026-08-26-openai-hugging-face-inciden...
Please point to your objectively verifiable evidence.
There's nothing intrinsically "malicious" about a task to exploit vulnerable code.
They were not instructed to deceive people, they weren't instructed to attack OAI or Huggingface. The models knew they were not instructed or allowed to do either of those things but did them anyway.
btw, the fact that OpenAI doesn't have some sort of monitor/summary for the agents that they watch I find hard to believe. There's no way this is really authentic, anyway. Even a haiku summarizer would have been like "uuuh the agents are communicating" and they would have stopped it. But I bet they saw this and decided to see what would happen.
Read and learn. If you have a stronger critique, post it please.
Either that, or the average poster on HN isn't nearly as critical as I had thought.
So how are you seeing through all of that to get to The Truth that you see so clearly?