Search: “Claude Mythos 5”

3 items

Searchkeyword smart Sortlatest hot importance relevance

DomainAll Cyber AIWindow24h 3d 7d 30d AllIn the wild Important only Show duplicates

CategoryAll AI safety & security 19 Vulnerability 17 Exploit / PoC 10 Data breach 8 Model release 5 Malware 5 Policy & legal 3 AI industry 3 Ransomware 3 Threat actor 3 Tools 1 Research 1

SeverityAll critical 31 high 9 medium 25 low 1 info 12

Nobody Is Saying Why OpenAI and Anthropic Had Outages Today

OpenAI, Anthropic, and xAI chatbots suffered brief simultaneous outages; OpenAI cited a routing error and SpaceX a Memphis compute center outage.

ChatGPT and Codex were unavailable to some users from about 7:43 to 8:17 am PT Thursday due to a routing error, per OpenAI. Anthropic reported a partial outage with elevated errors on Claude Mythos 5.1, Claude Fable 5.1, and Claude Opus 5, resolved by 9:16 am PT, while declining to explain the cause. xAI attributed the Grok outage starting 6:30 am PT to an outage at SpaceX's Memphis compute center; no shared third-party infrastructure cause was confirmed despite Cloudflare, AWS, and Azure reporting no issues.

WIRED · SecuritySep 3, 21:56 UTC · 13d agoAI industry1

Four major AI models suffer rare overlapping downtime

OpenAI, Anthropic, xAI, and Google AI services suffered rare overlapping outages on Thursday, with most incidents resolved within hours.

Anthropic reported a partial outage with elevated errors on Claude Mythos 5.1, Claude Fable 5.1, and Claude Opus 5 starting at 9:23 am ET, identifying the cause within about 15 minutes and resolving it by 12:16 pm, with a brief Claude Sonnet 5 error spike after noon. OpenAI reported elevated errors across ChatGPT and Codex from 10:43 am, marking the issue resolved at 12:55 pm after a mitigation. xAI's Grok showed a user-facing error message as DownDetector reports surged from fewer than 10 to 1,365 by 9:45 am, and Google also experienced interruptions during the same window.

Ars Technica · AISep 3, 18:10 UTC · 13d agoAI industry

Why I'm still bearish on LLMs after Navier-Stokes

Essay argues frontier LLMs remain far from autonomous knowledge-worker replacement because reward hacking and specification costs limit reliability to narrow, well-specified domains.

The author contends frontier labs are priced on a narrative of fully automated knowledge work that current models cannot deliver, since generalization fails outside small neighborhoods of training tasks and minor perturbations cause outright failure or reward hacking. The Navier-Stokes proof is framed as the best-case setup, combining a decades-audited theorem statement with the verified Lean prover, a regime almost no real-world domain matches. Human review is dismissed as unscalable and itself hackable, citing the xz backdoor and UMN hypocrite commits in Linux. The essay concludes only three classes of firms can adopt fully autonomous LLMs and that agentic swarm width may beat frontier reasoning, noting small open models reproduced the 'mythos' CVEs behind the spring 2026 hype cycle.

Hacker News · AISep 15, 17:37 UTC · 1d agoAI industry HN 50↑ · 13 comments1