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

211–220 of 1001 posts

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

#211

Post by yunwal »

WarmWash wrote: post #208
winterismute wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> On some level

The appropriate level would be regulation though? Like I just don't get how we can argue that arbitrarily throttling companies is ok.

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

#212

Post by jasonvorhe »

rvz wrote: post #159
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…

This move was obvious the moment Anthropic pleaded to the government to regulate them. As predicted, [0] it has now been applied to OpenAI and soon anyone else releasing highly capable models. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48511849

Wondering how long it'll take for the US to make it... more difficult to use Chinese models once they've caught up.

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

#213

Post by stronglikedan »

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…

seems pretty smart to me. opens doors and provides opportunities that those that don't court the government will miss out on. of course, if they're principled, that's okay (regardless of which admin it is), but the reality is most companies aren't. gotta get a leg up somehow.

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

#214

Post by simsla »

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.

There's a pretty big difference between "we need laws and regulations" and "let Trump do whatever he feels like today."

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

#215

Post by JoshTriplett »

alberto467 wrote: post #205
winterismute wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> regulate when the need for it arises

I agree. But that need has absolutely arisen. The US government is not exactly the best steward for this kind of thing, but some model other than "race each other as fast as we can" is desperately needed here.

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

#217

Post by tancop »

alberto467 wrote: post #207
iAMkenough wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

for america yeah. for the world the only real risks are american, chinese or corporate dominance. thats why its important to support open models wherever they come from and smaller players like mistral in france or black forest in germany.

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

#218

Post by refulgentis »

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.

Source for this? :)

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

#219

Post by peter422 »

ronsor wrote: post #195
winterismute wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

This arrangement is already dubiously legal. The government is already being sued over the Fable incident with Anthropic. No amount of rules can stop people who are willing to break them. Only enforcement can.

Anthropic just needs to donate millions of dollars to a “MAGA Inc” like Greg Brockman did and they’ll get regulated properly from now on.

It’s a perfectly good system for government regulation.

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

#220

Post by boc »

lend000 wrote: post #134
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…

Anthropic's fear-mongering and marketing is the reason we have these restrictions in the first place. Despite their virtue signaling, Anthropic is the only major lab that has never released an open weights model, has been caught intentionally nerfing a model after release (Opus 4.6), intentionally and silently degrades performance for suspected competitors and AI researchers, complains incessantly about distillation…

> Anthropic's fear-mongering

I mean it's fear-mongering until it isn't. I think people have become a bit too comfortable with dismissing the dangers of misaligned AI as simply "marketing hype".

Post reply on HN