Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

U.S. government will decide who gets to use GPT-5.6

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 1001 posts

Re: U.S. government will decide who gets to use GPT-5.6

#201

Post by iAMkenough »

razighter777 wrote: post #135

I hope this doesn't become the new norm where government becomes the bottleneck for innovation in the AI space. It's worrying that with no formal and transparent policy framework that the government will be picking winners and losers and stifling innovation. There's been no public policy, executive order, legislation, or otherwise on this, I wonder if anyone has filed FOIA requests for these decisions or the conversa…

But think about how terrible it would be if “foreigners” (including the ones that work on these models) got access!

We must clutch our pearls and cite National Security as a reason to pick winners and losers, just like the government did for Fable.

Re: U.S. government will decide who gets to use GPT-5.6

#202

Post by baq »

razighter777 wrote: post #135

I hope this doesn't become the new norm where government becomes the bottleneck for innovation in the AI space. It's worrying that with no formal and transparent policy framework that the government will be picking winners and losers and stifling innovation. There's been no public policy, executive order, legislation, or otherwise on this, I wonder if anyone has filed FOIA requests for these decisions or the conversa…

Shadow of export controls is very long indeed.

The Project is almost here.

Re: U.S. government will decide who gets to use GPT-5.6

#203

Post by loudmax »

tiahura wrote: post #155
Fraterkes wrote: post #132

"We believe in broad access, and we plan to make GPT‑5.6 Sol, Terra, and Luna generally available in the coming weeks. As part of our ongoing engagement with the U.S. government, we previewed our plans and the models’ capabilities ahead of today’s launch. At their request, we are starting with a limited preview for a small group of trusted partners whose participation has been shared with the government, before relea…

Do you feel the same way about FDA approvals? I mean, it seems like common sense - a limited beta test before widespread rollout. I'm not convinced they'll ever come up with a good framework for dealing with the cyber & bio issues, but getting triggered by a beta test rollout seems overboard.

It is common sense, and with literally any other administration in the past century it would seem like a good idea.

I have zero confidence that this particular administration has any interest in regulating the industry for the good of the country, much less for the good of humanity. They will use regulation to maximize personal profit for themselves and their cronies, at the expense of the nation. I would not have thought that of any other US administration in the past 100 years.

In the longer run, it probably won't matter. If the level of corruption we see currently becomes the norm, then the US is facing much bigger problems than counter-productive industrial policy.

Re: U.S. government will decide who gets to use GPT-5.6

#204

Post by ronsor »

GaryBluto wrote: post #200
refulgentis wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Our AI czar, David Sacks, whined and moaned about the idea of regulation, even said Anthropic begging for some guidance was asking for “regulatory capture” and was gloating about how right he was they wanted it, 2 weeks ago. I wonder if he understands why, now.

> Anthropic begging for some guidance Anthropic was "begging" to make it harder for competing companies to be founded.

They got the "leopards ate my face" ending.

Re: U.S. government will decide who gets to use GPT-5.6

#205

Post by alberto467 »

winterismute wrote: post #187
razighter777 wrote: post #135

I hope this doesn't become the new norm where government becomes the bottleneck for innovation in the AI space. It's worrying that with no formal and transparent policy framework that the government will be picking winners and losers and stifling innovation. There's been no public policy, executive order, legislation, or otherwise on this, I wonder if anyone has filed FOIA requests for these decisions or the conversa…

Indeed, I find quite ironic that some people in tech in the US complain about EU "regulations first" approach, but then their government seem to arbitrarily stop things from being released because, well, there is no established policy on safety guarantees or other similar aspects.

Let’s be real, as an EU citizen I have zero doubts that those models would also have been blocked if developed in EU.

I like the US approach better: regulate when the need for it arises, not before when you don’t know how the situation is going to evolve.

Re: U.S. government will decide who gets to use GPT-5.6

#206

Post by [deleted] »

postalcoder wrote: post #175
wahnfrieden wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Was it the norm for Trump's team to hand-select the specific customers who get access in the staged rollout, and to choose the date of wide release?

The AI companies were all asking for the government to regulate them. The government is doing what the companies asked for them to do. You can argue that, by government, they meant some legislative process, but I'd argue that regulation via bad executive order is much better than regulation via bad legislation because the former is tractable. I say this as an EO minimalist.

[deleted]

Re: U.S. government will decide who gets to use GPT-5.6

#207

Post by alberto467 »

iAMkenough wrote: post #201
razighter777 wrote: post #135

I hope this doesn't become the new norm where government becomes the bottleneck for innovation in the AI space. It's worrying that with no formal and transparent policy framework that the government will be picking winners and losers and stifling innovation. There's been no public policy, executive order, legislation, or otherwise on this, I wonder if anyone has filed FOIA requests for these decisions or the conversa…

But think about how terrible it would be if “foreigners” (including the ones that work on these models) got access! We must clutch our pearls and cite National Security as a reason to pick winners and losers, just like the government did for Fable.

There would be real risks yeah.

This is not something to joke about, its real.

Re: U.S. government will decide who gets to use GPT-5.6

#208

Post by WarmWash »

winterismute wrote: post #187
razighter777 wrote: post #135

I hope this doesn't become the new norm where government becomes the bottleneck for innovation in the AI space. It's worrying that with no formal and transparent policy framework that the government will be picking winners and losers and stifling innovation. There's been no public policy, executive order, legislation, or otherwise on this, I wonder if anyone has filed FOIA requests for these decisions or the conversa…

Indeed, I find quite ironic that some people in tech in the US complain about EU "regulations first" approach, but then their government seem to arbitrarily stop things from being released because, well, there is no established policy on safety guarantees or other similar aspects.

On some level though we have to be cognizant of the potential for harm these models have.

LLMs are still a little loosey goosey, and we are right on the cusp (if not there already) for an agent to hack a bank and steal money for some rando teenager with a penchant for jail breaking.

The regulations are and will be negative, but don't lose sight of what LLMs can do off the leash.

Re: U.S. government will decide who gets to use GPT-5.6

#209

Post by CamperBob2 »

razighter777 wrote: post #135

I hope this doesn't become the new norm where government becomes the bottleneck for innovation in the AI space. It's worrying that with no formal and transparent policy framework that the government will be picking winners and losers and stifling innovation. There's been no public policy, executive order, legislation, or otherwise on this, I wonder if anyone has filed FOIA requests for these decisions or the conversa…

It's worrying that with no formal and transparent policy framework that the government will be picking winners and losers and stifling innovation.

The market will demand such a framework. I suspect that's the larger idea here, in that Amodei not only wants to be in the room when that framework is written, he wants to be at the head of the table.

He apparently wants it so badly he's willing to set back his own company's IPO to make it happen, given that there can be no pure-play AI IPOs until the regulatory picture is sorted out.

Re: U.S. government will decide who gets to use GPT-5.6

#210

Post by alberto467 »

bigyabai wrote: post #160
vonneumannstan wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

> We don't let passengers fly on unvetted jumbo jets either and we prevent them from flying when they have problems. This is Mr. Fart's Favorite Colors all over again. Our "vetting" process is not any more useful than the billion-dollar metal detector you can skip with a TSA Precheck. It arguably does not deter the most dangerous attacks even slightly. What happens when a mentally-ill pilot locks their copilot out of…

What knowledge or skills do you have to be hating on the certification process for airplanes?

It’s just getting ridiculous at this point. There are plenty of industries regulated and certified by national or international agencies. And no they don’t get to do what they want.

Post reply on HN