I'm sorry, but I agree with the wiki editors in this case. Odin is obscure. The author of this blog post seems to think it's well known, but I don't think that's substantiated.
That understates how difficult it is to get to the level of performance they attained. The fact that it surpasses DeepSeek v4 in most ways shows that they accomplished some great work in this space.
I think you're missing the point. Everything you said is theoretically correct, but the parent comment was talking about the concrete circumstance of pentesting with the top models today.
Let's just take GPT 5.5 and Opus 4.8 as an example. Both are worse than Mythos 5, but they're capable of quite a bit when the guardrails are lifted and they're paired with a skilled human operator. They more than "good enough" to reach the same result with the addition of some human effort.
It is strange, huh? But the hype cycles around these models often ignore good contenders. Xiaomi's MiMo-V2.5 Pro was doing really well and didn't get much hype either.
Seems like there's no official blog post with benchmark results yet. But I'm once again thankful for the Chinese AI labs for being open with their work and contributing it to the world under permissive licenses like this. The Fable 5 fiasco is just another reminder of how valuable these things are to have.
I've never understood the appeal of minimal writing apps. They've got beautiful UIs, but I could theoretically do everything here on a normal writing app, couldn't I?
Thanks so much for explaining this. I was just about to comment "Isn't Vulkan the main OpenCL and CUDA alternative these days?" could you share a bit more on what Vulkan is missing relative to the other two?
Yeah I was wondering about this too. It seems like way too much per GPU considering the purchase price of a B200 was around $40k last time I checked. So if we naively ignore the price of electricity and maintanence, it would only take 5 months before renting is a worse deal than buying outright.
> A University System Went All In on A.I. Now It’s Tearing Itself Apart.
The NYT often has a bias against AI, but the article's contents are actually a pretty reasonable summary of the different attitudes towards AI in academia. Then they went and slapped a terribly sensationalist headline on it, which doesn't seem well supported by the actual article.
Hey there, I'm going to check out your project because the comments here have me a little worried that OP's project might have some quality issues.
Two things I found a little confusing from the docs though:
I couldn't easily find a page describing what it can't do yet. I saw that it only works with a "strict, deterministic subset of TypeScript", but is there a page showing what's included and not included in that subset?
Also, what's an "ambient surface" in this context? Is that a compiler term I'm just not familiar with?
This is such a refreshing policy. AI code is welcome as long as it's good, but comments have to be human.
If someone can't take the time to write their own replies (in their own words), then it feels fair to assume that they didn't take the time to test, review, and clean whatever code they submitted.
Yeah I really agree. There's no overage pricing on their website's main pricing page, which makes me think the jump from "Team" to "Pro" to negotiating an enterprise contract will really hurt. Going from $39/month to $199/moth because you needed slightly more is a really big jump in pricing. It's pretty much the opposite of what I would expect from a service that lets you scale to 0.