Anthropic does not publish the real reason for Mythos

English | Chinese Original

English translation of the Chinese original. This version is generated for international readers and may be refined over time.

Date: 2026-04-09

Anthropic recently said: Our latest model, Claude Mythos, is too powerful, too threatening to be used by the public.

As soon as it's out, it's on the Internet.

After I read it, I thought of two questions:

First, if it's really dangerous enough not to go to the public, why give it to Microsoft and Nvidia? ** Second, since it's dangerous, why do you want to make it public?**

Having understood these two questions, I conclude:

Mythos' cyber security story is probably just a psychological tactic, and the real reason is much more complicated than the word "security".

Reason one: Commercial moat

It's the most visible and easy to read.

** If the model is too dangerous for the public, it should not be for Microsoft.**

Microsoft Azure runs the business of millions of companies around the world. Nvidia's GPU drives the data centre half day. Cisco's equipment is attached to the core network of numerous enterprises.

The consequences of the break-up of any of these three families were 10, 000 times more severe than that of an independent developer who took the model to dig the hole.

So the "safe" reason is not tenable under this logic.

The real reason is hidden elsewhere:

** First, prevent distillation.**

When your model is Global SOTA, and in two months' time, Chinese labs will be able to use one-50 to make something that's really close to you, what is the business?

Open-source communities take Mythos fine-tune, distilling a version with comparable but cheaper performance. Competing models will catch up quickly, and Anthropic's pricing rights will collapse overnight.

Non-publishing is the most immediate means of protecting model weights from copying and distillation.

** Second, computing resources are limited, choosing to whom, deciding how the company lives.**

AI says it's all Token's business. Token needs money, GPU needs money, training more money.

The average user (high monthly loss rate, narrow speed limit is threatening "I'm going to run a local model"), the business client (monthly loss rate of 1%, high premium ability) -- one out of two, the answer is clear.

Did you notice something?

Anthropic publicly promotes the "dangerous" of Mythos without ever saying that Mythos wrote any patches.

Discover the problem of solving the problem.

I'm very strong in this field, and you should be worried about competing models, using them.**

But what does that have to do with security?

We don't write patches, we don't fix holes. It's called marketing.

** If Anthropic 100% is really worried about cyber security, they shouldn't even publish Mythos.**

Claude Opus can also identify a number of cyber-security weaknesses, and Anthropic can already warn publicly that our models are too dangerous in the area of cybersecurity.

But they didn't.

It wasn't until now that this time of day -- the real reason is not security, it's Mythos, and they need a reason not to publish.

Cybersecurity is the most convenient excuse. No one's going to look into it. No one will question why to Microsoft but not to the public.

Mythos will never publish.

When the business client is tied up, the business cooperation is negotiated, and the regulatory approval is in place -

Anthropic will find the right window of time to put Mythos out. By that time, the security narrative will have been upgraded to a higher level: "We have resolved these problems with our business partners, and now we can open it to the public with confidence."

But before that, you heard "Mythos too dangerous"--

It's marketing. It's the moat. It's psychological warfare.

Not safe.