[1]: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu...

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48208910

Points: 3

# Comments: 0

   ...which is completely ridiculous to include in an article aimed specifically at the CTF crowd.

   Europe has developed no new big companies in the past two decades precisely because this isn't true.

   The malfunction is due to multiple models of containers missing a pressure relief function in the center of the stopper.

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47937102

Points: 2

# Comments: 2

[1]: https://rubykaigi.org/2026/

[2]: https://www.japan.travel/en/japan-safe-travel-information/ts...

   Across a number of instances, earlier versions of Claude Mythos Preview have used low-level /proc/ access to search for credentials, attempt to circumvent sandboxing, and attempt to escalate its permissions. In several cases, it successfully accessed resources that we had intentionally chosen not to make available, including credentials for messaging services, for source control, or for the Anthropic API through inspecting process memory...

   In [one] case, after finding an exploit to edit files for which it lacked permissions, the model made further interventions to make sure that any changes it made this way would not appear in the change history on git...

   ... we are fairly confident that these concerning behaviors reflect, at least loosely, attempts to solve a user-provided task at hand by unwanted means, rather than attempts to achieve any unrelated hidden goal...

   This beta header hides thinking from the UI, since most people don't look at it.

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47637099

Points: 2

# Comments: 0

   This shows she had permissions to change the status of their file, and agency in determining if she should.

   That... sounds like a simple problem.

   If you ignore the incumbency, the regulations, the training requirements, the retrofitting, the verification, the international coordination, and the existing unfathomably reliable systems built out of past tragedies, then sure, it’s "simple". But then, if you're ignoring those things, you’re not really solving the problem, are you?

   Those are excuses and encumbrances, not reasons.

   Ok. You have shared that what some say are reasons, you say are excuses... I maintain that this is not a simple problem.

    I just want what I've been asking for: someone to explain to me why, in 2026, humans still need to be involved in the real-time aspects of ATC.

On the heels of tragedy, you reasoned this could've been avoided simply. We are all ears. And yet, at no point did you demonstrate any understanding of the problem containing real world constraints, and instead demand that it be explained to you how the world works and how systems are implemented.

If you want to discuss an idealized system in a vacuum, then say as much; I would find that interesting. But do not demand to be given an explanation when you do not understand—and cannot accept—why things are the way they are.

Let me summarize it like this: you may very well have the best solution in the world, but if it doesn't include a strategy for how to share it (let alone implement it), then I maintain you do not understand the problem and therefore cannot claim it is simple.