About nine months ago, I and three friends decided that AI had gotten good enough to monitor large codebases autonomously for security problems. We started a company around this, trying to leverage the latest AI models to create a tool that could replace at least a good chunk of the value of human pentesters. We have been working on this project since since June 2024.

Within the first three months of our company's existence, Claude 3.5 sonnet was released. Just by switching the portions of our service that ran on gpt-4o, our nascent internal benchmark results immediately started to get saturated. I remember being surprised at the time that our tooling not only seemed to make fewer basic mistakes, but also seemed to qualitatively improve in its written vulnerability descriptions and severity estimates. It was as if the models were better at inferring the intent and values behind our [...]

---

Outline:

(04:44) Are the AI labs just cheating?

(07:22) Are the benchmarks not tracking usefulness?

(10:28) Are the models smart, but bottlenecked on alignment?

---

First published:
March 24th, 2025

Source:
https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/4mvphwx5pdsZLMmpY/recent-ai-model-progress-feels-mostly-like-bullshit

---

Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO.

---

Images from the article:

A scene showing a person in a suit questioning something skeptically.

Apple Podcasts and Spotify do not show images in the episode description. Try Pocket Casts, or another podcast app.

“Recent AI model progress feels mostly like bullshit” by lc

LessWrong (30+ Karma)

“Recent AI model progress feels mostly like bullshit” by lc