"Good guys, bad guys, and explosions, as far as the eye can see..."

The boxing in (Mike Tyson's) Punch-Out!! is so cartoony and abstract that it's been described as not really a boxing game, but a puzzle game that involves throwing punches.

What they're saying is that the capabilities of Mythos to find overlooked vulnerabilities in large code bases are real.

We're in a new era for security. You're either using AI to catch vulnerabilities in your code... or someone else is, and 0wning you.

There's a wonderful thing that we used to have and still do have, but might be going away soon. It's called "terrestrial television". For decades people streamed programming over the airwaves, straight off the antenna! For free! Ad-supported of course, but... no tracking! (Actually opt-in tracking with a Nielsen People Meter.)

You can also use a DVR to record terrestrial broadcast TV, and there's even tools to automatically skip ads: https://github.com/Protektor-Desura/jellyfin-dvr-comskip

Everything you think you know about AI was true until about 6 months ago. Now the frontier models and agentic tools are good at programming—better than most professional programmers would be unguided. And even if Claude Mythos isn't half as good as they say it is, it's changed the calculus of security significantly: use AI to vet your code before deployment... or someone else will, right before they 0wn you.

I genuinely can't tell if this is a parody, because this exact post could have been, and was, written every month for the past few years.

it's not always the coding. it's keeping straight what you've asked it. I've seen mistakes that almost mimic memory loss. Node A is measuring node B. OK, next step is to apply this update to the measurement codebase in node B. Uh, no dude, we are working on node A.

this one anonymous guy may be vibe coding himself to $200k, but there might be bombs in there that won't go off until later.

And this is why the most powerful consumer computing hardware in the world is made by a lifestyle brand (Apple). My wife about lost it when she saw the MacBook Neo in citrus, in person.

My wife's friend, when asked why she wanted an iPhone (my wife and I see the prospect of switching from Android a downgrade), she excitedly opens up the camera app (we were in a store), takes a picture, and then screams "Did you see this? THIS!" (and points at the captured picture bouncing animation)... "I just love this (makes the quick palm closing/dragging down gesture in the air). That's all the reason I need to buy one..." And then she did.

These people subsidize my index fund returns

And they weren't bulky tactical phones that looked like the smartphone equivalent of Humvees?

Samsung xCover series phones are smaller than flagship phones with a case that many people add to achieve the same durability.

"Snooping as usual, I see!"

"For Miss Granger's ingenuity and resourcefulness, finding and patching a zero-day vulnerability in the router firmware... I award fifty points to Gryffindor."

When I was in university we had the "Honor System"—no proctors, but you had to sign a statement on every exam and assignment that you did not cheat. And if you did cheat, one of your fellow students could report you to the Honor Board. Basically using the prisoners' dilemma to enforce honesty. And the Honor Board were always threatening to bring proctors back if cheating continued.

But yeah, everything was hand-written. On sheets of paper with pencil. I even had to write x86 assembly out by hand for my CPU architecture class. Of course, laptops were available back then but not cellphones and certainly not LLMs, so cheating by electronic means probably presents a stickier wicket now than it did back then.

The prisoner's dilemma requires that both people are facing the same consequences and are promised leniency if they give up the other person. I'm struggling to figure out how this conforms to a person giving up a cheater to the honor board. What am I missing?