Dare Obasanjo

Anthropic’s latest model, Claude Mythos, is so good at finding bugs in software that the company isn’t releasing it yet for safety reasons.

Instead it’s initially releasing the model to a consortium of companies like Apple , Microsoft and the Linux Foundation so they can fix their security bugs first.

Considering how disruptive Opus has already been to software development, 2026 will be a watershed year for software engineers

https://techcrunch.com/2026/04/07/anthropic-mythos-ai-model-preview-security

Anthropic debuts preview of powerful new AI model Mythos in new cybersecurity initiative | TechCrunch

The new model will be used by a small number of high-profile companies to engage in defensive cybersecurity work.

TechCrunch
Apr 8 at 12:54pmWeb
Show threadprom™️17h ago
@carnage4life FYI, unfollowing because you keep arguing the side of people who disrupt for profit, with a quasi-fascist "might makes right" attitude. AI might really change some things, but analysis about it will always be incomplete without the social side.
Show threadDare Obasanjo16h ago
@promovicz Good bye 👋🏾
Show threadAlbert Cardona15h ago

@carnage4life

Cue the joke where Mythos replaces the whole Windows kernel with Linux, using Wine's API. Best security move possible for Microsoft.

Show threadAiono13h ago
@carnage4life as always I take any claims from X company about how much X is good with a grain of salt. It could be true but I would only believe it when I see for myself. It's just in company's interest to market it as very dangerous because that implies it's revolutionary.
Show threadziggy13h ago
@carnage4life I wonder whether we can really distinguish this model from “let’s just run static analysis tools and input fuzzing in large scale “. If we would have done in the past on an actual scale (with the compute power we now have for AI), quite a lot of problems could have been found already.
Show threadShafik Yaghmour11h ago

@carnage4life

Finding bugs is easy, wading through the false positives is the really really painful part.

The tools we have are very good at finding bugs, what they are bad at is keeping false positives down. Some of them are really good.

I have to deal w/ this a lot and this is my experience. I spend a large chunk of my time dealing w/ false positives and from what I understand this is the general experience of anyone supporting a large code base.

We find a lot of real bugs but the pain is real.

Hell, if you throw fuzzers into the mix you can drop everything and just fix bugs for years in large enough projects. You can drown in fuzzer bugs. The fun is prioritizing them.

Show threadJeremy7h ago
@carnage4life
I guess some ppl will fall for marketing hype....