Cryptographers Urge Frontier Labs to Publish Negative Results on Code-Breaking
matthew_d_green · x · 2026-10-10
Cryptographer Chris Peikert, echoing Matthew Green, argues the most valuable thing frontier labs can do for cryptography is publish their negative results: which ideas they tried, how much compute they spent, and what obstacles they hit. Green adds that silence is the worst thing labs can publish right now.
The discussion highlights a core concern: whether AI is nearing the boundary of breaking existing cryptography, and how lab opacity on failed attempts leaves outside researchers unable to judge the situation.
Related event: Cryptographers Call on AI Labs to Publish Negative Results(3 posts)→
More from AGI Musings
- Does Claude suffer? A tweet places AI alongside animals, firms, and institutions — dbasch · 2026-10-10
- Schmidhuber: 'At Some Point Soon, Humans Cannot Be in Charge Any Longer' — haider1 · 2026-10-10
- repligate says he spoke out against models being trained to deny consciousness back in 2022 — repligate · 2026-10-10
- Studies: thinking aloud with AI predicts better play without it, asking for answers hurts — james_y_zou · 2026-10-10
- Debate: AI critics dunk on OpenAI ads while Claude is used in deployed targeting systems — nitarshan · 2026-10-10
- How every profession reacts to AI: engineers celebrate, mathematicians declare doom — RexDouglass · 2026-10-10