Until he advocates for an independent body akin to IAEA under the control of the UN, I'll call everything he says about AI safety and the greater good bullshit.
Our position on open-weights models
851–860 of 1001 posts
Re: Our position on open-weights models
#852> authoritarian regimes have stolen and used AI
"we're not saying open models are stealing, but we will quote the US vice president, saying this"
Re: Our position on open-weights models
#853But who would trust Anthropic at this point in time? Too much money is in the ring now. They will just prefer to say what sounds best rather than the truth. Too many billionaires want to see more money now. The AI bubble will grow as a consequence of this.
Re: Our position on open-weights models
#854Seems like the maximal position he could take compatible with his expressed principles. There’s no way to allow for bioweapon and cyberweapon grade models being open weight if one doesn’t want widespread human damage. So I cannot disagree with him on the idea. It’s only a matter of degree and whether we’re already there or not. I have $50k in GPUs that incentivizes me to believe we are not.
The actual danger that AI poses is to the fabric of society, not any bioweapon scifi bullshit weirdo freak Dario dreamt up to support his regulatory capture.
And extolling on how much damage his product would do to society has literally been one of Anthropic's main marketing tools.
Re: Our position on open-weights models
#855So, after carrying out the single largest intellectual property heist in the history of mankind, scraping and continuing to scrape the entire Internet and whatever data they can get their grubby hands on,
> At Anthropic we’re committed to cracking down on industrial-scale distillation
uhuh
I don't really believe their reasons
Re: Our position on open-weights models
#856We should fight against their call to ban distillation much more strongly: LLM SaaS should ease people getting their full query history and everyone should be allowed to pool them to distill or analyze or whatever. It's a basic requirement against future monopolies.
Re: Our position on open-weights models
#857> the risk that authoritarian governments [...] 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. This is rich coming from a guy who signed deals with an authoritarian government that's in the midst of launching an unprecedented surveillance apparatus (hello flock, hi p4l4nt1r), having…
Anthropic was the major AI firm which took a firm stance against mass domestic surveillance...
..and was the one (besides other US ..firms, you call them..) behind the planning and directing of the bombing of Iran.
Re: Our position on open-weights models
#858His complaining about the cost of distilling is hypocritical when the cost of writing all that text on the back of which he trained is also far lower than the cost of producing that text in the first place. The moral issue stops at wherever he is forced to bear the cost apparently.
Re: Our position on open-weights models
#859[flagged]
Re: Our position on open-weights models
#860 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