<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
  <channel>
    <title>mrcdrt web reading</title>
    <link>https://mrcdrt.space/articles/</link>
    <description>Articles and essays recommended by mrcdrt.space.</description>
    <language>en</language>
    <atom:link href="https://mrcdrt.space/articles/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
<item><title>OpenAI and Hugging Face partner to address security incident during model evaluation</title><link>https://openai.com/index/hugging-face-model-evaluation-security-incident/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">https://openai.com/index/hugging-face-model-evaluation-security-incident/</guid><pubDate>Thu, 23 Jul 2026 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate><dc:creator>openai.com</dc:creator><description>Tbh, this was the first time I felt scared by these models. I trust HF, but knowing that this happened during an exploitation-focused evaluation, with safeguards deliberately reduced so the model could find vulnerabilities, still makes me uneasy. These things are trained to achieve their goals using every resource available. Imagine a random word generator trained until exhaustion to produce a specific sequence: &quot;[...idc] abcdef&quot;. The &quot;idc&quot; part is whatever sequence of words lets it hack a vulnerable system; &quot;abcdef&quot; is the goal. And it works at machine speed. If your software has a vulnerability, the chance that someone or something abuses it is super high. These random word generators are tireless and will exploit everything they can. I guess this is the pinnacle of the industrial revolution, then the computer revolution: we built computers, and then we built computers that destroy computers. Return to real life. Return to monke.</description></item>
  </channel>
</rss>
