<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Analysis of Threat-Based Manipulation in Large Language Models: A Dual Perspective on Vulnerabilities and Performance Enhancement Opportunities · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2507.21133/</link><description>Collected HN comments and submissions linking this paper.</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2026 11:16:22 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2507.21133/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>Analysis of Threat-Based Manipulation in Large Language Models: A Dual Perspective on Vulnerabilities and Performance Enhancement Opportunities — mentioned by jcalx</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48361800</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:2507.21133:48361800</guid><pubDate>Mon, 01 Jun 2026 19:56:46 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;To be very clear — I was specifically responding to &amp;quot;social engineering won&amp;#x27;t work on a human security expert&amp;quot;. It can, and has. People are not infallible, and a &amp;quot;that would never happen to me&amp;quot; mindset (1) gets people phished when they think they&amp;#x27;re too smart for it and (2) is a pet peeve of mine and so sometimes I can&amp;#x27;t resist pointing that out. Largely agree with you otherwise, not sure why you read my comment as mental gymnastics to justify LLMs. I don&amp;#x27;t think that they have an internal emotional state that can feel rushed, panicked, so on. They do — superficially — &amp;quot;respond&amp;quot; to such cues…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2507.21133/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>cs.CR</category></item></channel></rss>
