We've been told models are too dangerous since gpt2.

There comes a point where you not only want the boy to stop crying wolf, but hopefully be eaten by one.

That example is brought up a lot, but in retrospect the concerns about Gpt2 were pretty valid: https://techcrunch.com/2019/02/17/openai-text-generator-dang...

>OpenAI said its new natural language model, GPT-2, was trained to predict the next word in a sample of 40 gigabytes of internet text. The end result was the system generating text that “adapts to the style and content of the conditioning text,” allowing the user to “generate realistic and coherent continuations about a topic of their choosing.” The model is a vast improvement on the first version by producing longer text with greater coherence.

>But with every good application of the system, such as bots capable of better dialog and better speech recognition, the non-profit found several more, like generating fake news, impersonating people, or automating abusive or spam comments on social media.

I don’t fully agree with this sentiment. Just because we were told something and it didn’t come true before, it doesn’t mean it can’t come true now, and that the capabilities are there now.

At this point we have enough of real evidence from project glasswing like the massive Firefox security patches from Mythos findings. This isn’t crying wolf.

I’m very glad that they’re actually being grownups and not yolo’ing something this important, and are working with groups until we can secure critical infrastructure before making this more available.