If you make a git repository on your machine and then delete the entire directory it is in you can not recover it despite git being DVCS. If you have 2 forks of the repo stored on the same disc as the upstream repo and that disc dies, you lose everything.
I'm paying homage to the saying that "RAID is not a backup." In a technical sense RAID can create a backup of each block, but that is not what people are referring to when they say that phrase. They mean it as a backup as one may need for disaster recovery.
I suspect you’re referencing this specific instance and the parent commenter interpreted you as speaking in a generalized way about blog posts in general.
That's someone who is confident enough to have an evidently successful enough career to be able to access Mythos in its currently-limited rollout and yet not take themselves terribly seriously online.
Realistically their opinion deserves to hold more weight than the median HN comment.
I would prefer a pseudo-anonymous account if possible. Obviously if this is a marketing stunt the very not anonymous feedback is called into question immediately.
That said: I already was aware of Mozilla's account and despite what you are thinking, it essentially confirms everything.
> The biggest differentiating factor was the use of an agent harness, a piece of code that wraps around an LLM to guide it through a series of specific tasks. For such a harness to be useful, it requires significant resources to customize it to the project-specific semantics, tooling, and processes it will be used for.
Yep. Sounds exactly right. So the question is do we really need Mythos for this or can almost any reasonably close to frontier AI model accomplish similar results with a sufficiently advanced harness?
Jury's out but my vote is "probably most of the way". After all, alongside all of the splashy zero days dropped by eager AI companies, Greg Kroah-Hartman has been posting many useful, if minor patches to the Linux kernel produced by nothing more than a single 128 GiB Framework Desktop. So apparently, even small models can be very useful if you can find a way to get the noise out.
Mythos could still be very useful and effective and still be mostly a marketing ploy, and that's because until very recently investment in trying to make LLMs work for security auditing has been underserved. Without more substantial information, it's difficult to tell how much better at security research Mythos is vs say, Opus or DeepSeek 4 coupled with a good agent harness would be.
And in that sense, it's the same sort of crap as the GPT-2 and GPT-3 releases. A lot of hooplah about how dangerous it is to humanity. Then it turns out it's only dangerous enough that it needs to be gated behind an additional monthly subscription.
The most intelligent person involved in the highest level projects at my current company introduces themselves as an out of work circus clown.
There is an incredible amount of competency signaled by someone who was given access to this model but doesn’t treat their online presence like a professional resume.
They won’t until the winds change, and people start talking about the tradeoffs of Claude Code vs any of the other thousand good quality agent harnesses out there that recognize AGENTS.md
Opencode is good enough for most workflows IME, even if it doesn’t have the kitchen sink of features as cc
reply