> If you look at everything through their safe AGI mission it all makes sense.

Except for, you know, all the outside investors and the forthcoming IPO.

A no-investment policy would take them off the scene entirely. Essentially handing over the reins to OpenAI, Google, and others. Their position is something close to "if I don't do it, someone worse will".

There's a more nuanced discussion that could be had about how to balance relevance with outside influence. But at a foundational level it should be acknowledged that the tradeoff exists, and that receiving outside investment can't alone be seen as evidence of corruption.

Besides that, there's more that can be said about other things like their corporate structure or the degree to which they accelerated the AI race.

▲

bloppe an hour ago | parent [-]

"if I don't do it, someone worse will"

Of course that's what Dario thinks because that's what every tech CEO thinks. Dario, Sam, Sundar, probably many Chinese CEOs as well. It's what everyone thinks. That's why they're competing so fiercely with one another. That's why they basically make all the same decisions. That's why we need properly open source AI.

▲

adahn 39 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

It's hard to be certain what each individual thinks. We can do our best to judge based on what they each say and do. And there are significant differences in what each of these individuals have chosen to say and do over the years. The info available to the public makes it seem a lot like Dario's motivations & priorities differ from those of Sam and others.

This doesn't seem like the right place to spend my time litigating that point to its fullest extent (no-one here is doing that). But there's plenty of relevant info surrounding eg.:

* The New Yorker article on Altman [1]

* The story behind Anthropic's founding

* Various efforts to influence government policy (a16z policies and contributors [2], Trump's inauguration donors [3], giving Trump credit for AI infrastructure [4], Dario's op-eds [5])

1: https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2026/04/13/sam-altman-may...

2: https://a16z.com/portfolio/

3: https://www.opensecrets.org/trump/2025-inauguration-donors

4: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pe11mJ8mCHU

5: https://darioamodei.com/

▲

solenoid0937 an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

Open source AI fails first contact with sufficiently-intelligent-as-to-be-dangerous AI.

The day Mythos class models are open sourced will not be a good day. I don't think you understand the impact that will have on the world and on cyber defenders everywhere. It will be pure chaos.

Even if you don't think Mythos-class is the bar, open source has to stop at some point, you don't hand everyone a superweapon.

	▲	bloppe 27 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		Every single one of those sentences is highly dubious. Cyber-defenders would be pretty jazzed about having easier access to Mythos-class models. Cyber-defense is easier with better tools.

▲

solenoid0937 an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

You expect AGI to be built without additional investor money?