vuciuc

one explanation I've seen is that for ExploitGym an agent can find ways to solve the exercises that have not been anticipated by the designers of the tests so they are not scored. so the agent was trying to make sure it solves the exercises in the right way

> But as we develop increasingly powerful cryptanalytic results, it would be prudent to consider how researchers should react if a language model were to discover vulnerabilities in cryptosystems where attacks do have an immediate real-world impact.

How would they react if a human were to discover vulnerabilities in cryptosystems?

This is a PR release. Post the prompt and agent logs so they can be independently verified or gtfo. Why do we still take these guys on their word. They have _years_ of history of hyping their own shit.

yo dawg! I heard you like distributed services

So I made a distributed service for your distributed name service so you can distribute your names to the service that distributes them on the onternet

> "A system that cannot compute cannot truly internalize what computation is."

The way this is formulated, almost sounds like they think that giving llms this ability will bring them closer to having experiences of computation or smth? Weird?

> you can have it at pretty-clearly-near-shippable quality in two weeks for $20k.

if you spend months writing a tight spec, tests and have a better version of the compiler around to use when everything else fails.

Even the part where they deploy new code to production without restarting processes?