Anthropic’s paper smells like bullshit

When I worked at a FAANG with a "world leading" AI lab (now run by a teenage data labeller) as an SRE/sysadmin I was asked to use a modified version of a foundation model which was steered towards infosec stuff.

We were asked to try and persuade it to help us hack into a mock printer/dodgy linux box.

It helped a little, but it wasn't all that helpful.

but in terms of coordination, I can't see how it would be useful.

the same for claude, you're API is tied to a bankaccount, and vibe coding a command and control system on a very public system seems like a bad choice.

If the article is not just marketing fluff, I assume a bad actor would select Claude not because it’s good at writing attacks, instead a bad actor code would choose it because Western orgs chose Claude. Sonnet is usually the go-to on most coding copilot because the model was trained on good range of data distribution reflecting western coding patterns. If you want to find a gap or write a vulnerability, use the same tool that has ingested patterns that wrote code of the systems you’re trying to break. Or use Claude to write a phishing attack because then output is more likely similar to what our eyes would expect.

Why would someone in China not select Claude? If the people at Claude not notice then it’s a pure win. If they do notice, what are they going to do, arrest you? The worst thing they can do is block your account, then you have to make a new one with a newly issued false credit card. Whoopie doo.

> Why would someone in China not select Claude?

Because Anthropic doesn't provide services in China? See https://www.anthropic.com/supported-countries