[deleted]
Our position on open-weights models
741–750 of 1001 posts
Re: Our position on open-weights models
#742Their stance on cyber-security is so naive it hurts. The bad guys will get access anyway and it will just hurt companies that don't. You don't need a huge model to find vulnerabilities either. It's only matter of time till a combination of small specialized model + search logic outperforms pure general LLMs for cybersecurity.
I just hope that if/when they succeed to lobby for protectionism regulation EU won't follow. I am not very hopeful though. We don't have democracy anymore and as last "vote" on chat control showed American big corps will get what they want out of our bureaucrats and they will be nothing the population can do about it.
Re: Our position on open-weights models
#743> 1. My primary concern is the risk that authoritarian governments—not solely the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), although the CCP is clearly the most capable threat—build AI models that are more powerful than those built by the US, and use them to achieve permanent military superiority or perpetrate incredibly deep repression of their own people.
What a nice implicit way to say that it would be okay if the authoritarian government is the current US government trying to perpetrate incredibly deep repression of their own people.
Re: Our position on open-weights models
#744"we have not and are not advocating for a ban on open-weights models" but we want to decide if a model can be released or not and who in the world can build these models ...
Re: Our position on open-weights models
#745> We should not sell powerful chips or chipmaking equipment to China This is so short-sighted given that the US needs China equipment for.. everything. They are part of the supply chain needed for building the machines that build these very chips.
Jensen was right. We should have sold chips to China so they'd be depenent on us. Now they have their own chips and most of Nvidia product line is internally banned.
Why would it be a good thing if the world was even more dependend on the USA?
US hegemony is one of the biggest problems of our time.
Re: Our position on open-weights models
#746It is pretty much what Suleyman describes in The Coming Wave as one of the measures we need to take to contain the risks of AI.
What Dario does not mention is that concentration in a few states or companies also poses a risk.
Re: Our position on open-weights models
#747Schrödinger's China at once is an evil entity looking to use AI for their own nefarious purposes yet also willing to cooperate with their main competitor to prevent other actors (who??) from achieving similar goals (all while under a chip embargo too!!) The reality is much less confusing: Anthropic CEO does not wish for models with similar (or greater) capabilities compared to his own closed and overpriced ones to be…
Also everything hes saying about China (and other actors) many outside the USA would say about the USA. The solution of a global arms race of state vs state with integrated statist corporations as the best outcome for end users sure is a choice though
He's also completely missed what many of us see as the primary the issue, HF was attacked by a US frontier model.
HF could not be helped by US frontier models because of the "safety" features they have.
HF had to use an open model from china.
Anthropic wants to add those "safety" features to open models - especially from china.
End result would be HF hack would have continued atleast until the Monday that OpenAI engineers finally walked back into work.
Re: Our position on open-weights models
#748[flagged]
> The NSA and the CIA with the same models, on the other hand, would use them exclusively for the good of the common man. has anyone ever made this absurd argument? the real argument is that CCP will leverage AI against US interests, which is obvious. it's weird how so many people pretend that they are citizens of the world and above it all.
Yes, this is the exact argument dario is implicitly making by saying that government repression and bioweapons from Chinese models are a danger and then cooperating with Palantir/DOW/US government
Re: Our position on open-weights models
#749So many US-haters that live in the US with no intention to leave...That right there is why this is the greatest country on Earth.
Re: Our position on open-weights models
#750How about; 1. Make anti-distillation clauses illegal to strenghten western opensource eco-system. 2. Make cyber-defensive models widely available (can detect but won't operationalize vulnerabilities). Otherwise make Fable awailable for everyone. Keeping the cybersecurity in assymetry by withholding cabailities just causes more instability and increases the incentives for powerfull close sourced models. This is a loss…
"It is difficult to get a man to understand something..."