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

David Sacks: OpenAI and Anthropic Don't Need Regulations to Pace Frontier Models

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 255 posts

Re: David Sacks: OpenAI and Anthropic Don't Need Regulations to Pace Frontier Models

#81

Post by jacobgold »

blululu wrote: post #64
jacobgold wrote: post #47

Make it easy for these companies by passing a law that any AI model a company offers to the public (non-government) has to be released as open weights. This is how we deflate the bubble safely and completely, without having to introduce a government regulator that is likely to go either too far or not far enough. This resolves the coordination problem among these potentially good actors.

What? This is a terrible policy. In addition to the obvious AI safety risks, this just amounts to a free R&D subsidy to Amazon for hosting models. It would remove any incentive to do any R&D without AWS level physical infrastructure.

That's an understandable first thought, but consider what the goal is for this: slowing down future development.

This can be achieved by dramatically reducing the market value of models.

Re: David Sacks: OpenAI and Anthropic Don't Need Regulations to Pace Frontier Models

#82

Post by swingboy »

There’s a difference between a model recursively improving “itself” and improving itself via online learning, right?

The former being that these models are helping develop and train future models, but they might not veer too far off in architecture (yet). The latter being the same model being able to train/learn on the fly, in real time, permanently (not just in the current conversation/session), or in other words, adjusting/managing its own weights.

The latter seems far more likely to go out of control than the former. But, it also seems like it would take an entire paradigm shift in model architecture, but I could be wrong. Does anyone in the industry think any of these companies are actually close to that kind of self-improvement?

Re: David Sacks: OpenAI and Anthropic Don't Need Regulations to Pace Frontier Models

#83

Post by matwood »

Meneth wrote: post #42

They might need regulations, if they are for-profit companies with a responsibility to shareholders to maximize profit while sacrificing all other values.

> responsibility to shareholders to maximize profit while sacrificing all other values

This is not required to meet fiduciary duty, although it is a common misconception. The company officers and board have pretty broad leeway to run the company as they see fit as long as there is no fraud, illegal activity, or conflict of interests.

https://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2015/04/16/what-are-co...

Re: David Sacks: OpenAI and Anthropic Don't Need Regulations to Pace Frontier Models

#84

Post by PlasmaPower »

Meneth wrote: post #42

They might need regulations, if they are for-profit companies with a responsibility to shareholders to maximize profit while sacrificing all other values.

They are not. This is why OpenAI and Anthropic are Public Benefit Corporations, which gives them the ability to prioritize the public over profit. The issue is that an agreement between them to mutually slow down is an antitrust concern.

Re: David Sacks: OpenAI and Anthropic Don't Need Regulations to Pace Frontier Models

#85

Post by erichocean »

swingboy wrote: post #82

There’s a difference between a model recursively improving “itself” and improving itself via online learning, right? The former being that these models are helping develop and train future models, but they might not veer too far off in architecture (yet). The latter being the same model being able to train/learn on the fly, in real time, permanently (not just in the current conversation/session), or in other words, a…

> Does anyone in the industry think any of these companies are actually close to that kind of self-improvement?

Their current plan is to take the existing architecture and shorten the cycle times: move all new RLVR work into mid-training on a pre-existing base; apply new RLVR. Rinse and repeat.

If you did that daily, it would be roughly similar to how humans improve.

Re: David Sacks: OpenAI and Anthropic Don't Need Regulations to Pace Frontier Models

#86

Post by wwweston »

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #78
throwaway63467 wrote: post #18

I guess what they really want is to limit sale of AI models to compliant vendors and then raise the bar to compliance just high enough so they can pass it but smaller labs can’t. There’s no moat, it’s an efficient market that drives margins to zero right now, of course they don’t want that, collusion of the big vendors is the next logical step.

> There’s no moat People keep saying this, and while it may be partially true, it misses a very important detail. Right now, overall compute is a moat. Someone even commented on another of my comments that one reason Google is lagging is they don't have the same level of Nvidia farms as OpenAI and Anthropic. A big reason that OpenAI and Anthropic are racing so fast is they both want to get to recursive self improveme…

Which mostly seem to stem from the fundamental misalignment of OpenAI and Anthropic leaders/owners, aka the evil of the companies.

Arguably, though, their evil is well within the normal distribution of the usual evil of humanity magnified via the social technology of capitalism. The further tech is mostly raising that exponentiation to its own exponent. The unchecked singularity was embraced centuries ago.

Re: David Sacks: OpenAI and Anthropic Don't Need Regulations to Pace Frontier Models

#87

Post by Analemma_ »

elicash wrote: post #9
tjwebbnorfolk wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

poor Anthropic

A principled individual could dislike Anthropic and still not favor using government to punish speech.

Well you’re in the wrong place for that. Hacker News is mostly about showing how much smarter and more cynical you are than everyone else in the room, and attacking anyone who does actually have principles by accusing them of ulterior motives to justify your own inaction.

Re: David Sacks: OpenAI and Anthropic Don't Need Regulations to Pace Frontier Models

#88

Post by lrvick »

Maybe everyone forgets how PCI standards played out. They are an example of an industry self regulating, because the regulators have no idea how technology works.

Granted, PCI is so weak it is almost useless, and yet still better than anything congress could have come up with.

Where the government might have to step in, is by having a kill switch to cut off internet access from countries that fail to agree to common sense quarantines. We can do mutual remote attestation of labs across the world to ensure every big hot thermally-visable cluster of AI GPUs on the planet are accounted for and running secure enclaves and common sense isolation, along the lines of how we manage nukes.

The problem there is I just said too many technical words that seemingly not even the frontier labs understand, as evidenced by all the escapes.

Re: David Sacks: OpenAI and Anthropic Don't Need Regulations to Pace Frontier Models

#89

Post by dham »

asdfman123 wrote: post #15
Insanity wrote: post #3

They’ll slow down not because they “are worried” but because their improvements are stagnating as they hit financial and technical challenges.

Actually, one of the major challenges they'll face is getting enough electricity. That could stop AI growth in its tracks.

And the reason they get enough electricity is because people did the same scare tactics in the 70's against nuclear.
Post reply on HN