> What disturbs me is that there likely won’t be a big enough reaction to this policy wise.

Anthropic was blocked from releasing Fable without any such level of incident. OAI was also briefly blocked from releasing 5.6. Why do you think there is no policy appetite?

▲

Chance-Device 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Because that was just an attack on Anthropic by a hostile administration. And it worked, didn’t it? Anthropic had to turn their filters up to absurd levels, OpenAI didn’t. It’s got nothing to do with safety.

▲

JumpCrisscross 2 hours ago | parent [-]

> It’s got nothing to do with safety

Doesn't change the effect. Plenty of good policy is enacted by self-interested politiicans.

▲

space_fountain 22 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

We'll see if the admin also restricts access to OpenAI's new models, but if they don't it seems like a policy that is based around perceived fealty to the current admin won't do much to prevent misaligned/or dual function AI from causing problems

▲

Avicebron an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

Gatekeeping the public's access to models is "good policy" now? I suppose you think you'll get a dispensation to use Fable and Mythos?

▲

JumpCrisscross an hour ago | parent [-]

> Gatekeeping the public's access to models is "good policy" now?

Sorry, I was unclear. I mean that politicians being self serving doesn't tell you whether a policy is good or not.

▲

asdf88990 an hour ago | parent [-]

It almost always does, the few exceptions prove the role. Self-service is the antithesis of accountability to collective trust.

▲

JumpCrisscross 30 minutes ago | parent [-]

> Self-service is the antithesis of accountability to collective trust

Complex society is a potent counterargument to this hypothesis. Systems that rely on good people to work are fundamentally flawed. Instead, the game has to be about aligning self interets in favour of the collective.

	▲	asdf88990 a few seconds ago \| parent [-]
		The self-interest for the bureaucrat and representative is supposed to end at their remuneration including their handsome retirement options not shady side hustles and market manipulation at the cost of the collective. In matters of collective concern fair and just rarely aligns with personal self-interest. If you look at the outcome of highly corrupt states, you will see proliferation of Private Security, Collapsed education system, failed financial services and markets, not highly efficient systems in service of “self-interest of the administration”.

▲

matheusmoreira an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

> Why do you think there is no policy appetite?

Because China seems pretty eager to serve the rest of the world's needs if the USA doesn't stop their idiotic "safety" nonsense.

▲

Chance-Device an hour ago | parent | next [-]

How do you know that? How do you know that the Chinese aren’t exactly as uneasy about rapidly advancing AI capability and feel locked into the race because they think that the US will race ahead if they stop?

During the Cold War the nuclear arms race was brought under control gradually, because it was mutually beneficial, but it took time to build trust. This is no different. Nobody wins from the race.

▲

matheusmoreira an hour ago | parent [-]

> How do you know that the Chinese aren’t exactly as uneasy about rapidly advancing AI capability

I don't "know", I'm interpreting the world based on the knowledge I have and the information available to me.

China has never been one to care much about things like ethics or safety. While the west worries about climate change, China burns more coal than ever before. While the west balks at things like gene editing, the chinese press on with human enhancing research.

So I have no reason to believe they share in Anthropic's constant fearmongering over AI capabilities.

> Nobody wins from the race.

We win. I'm really looking forward to the day the chinese finally start manufacturing memory and GPUs. We desperately need more competition in this area to collapse hardware prices and make local AI models viable.

The optimal state of the world is one where all the billionaires are out there pouring their entire fortunes into training ever more godlike AIs for everyone else to use at ever cheaper prices. They can never be allowed to "win", ever, because if they do the competition ends and it turns into technofeudalism. Let them exhaust their fortunes on AI training then leak the weights so everyone can use them.

▲

asdf88990 an hour ago | parent | next [-]

If you look at energy consumption per capita and adjust for global production, you will see that the Chinese are almost at the very top.

It is of course given that in raw numbers the kitchen and biller-room will consume more energy in the household, but looking at raw numbers is shallow.

▲

Chance-Device 43 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

It’s not fear mongering though, is it? These models do have the cyber offensive capabilities claimed. Could Mythos walk someone through gain of function experiments on some virus? I’m pretty sure it could. We’re more protected by limited access to lab equipment and reagents than by difficulty.

The sad truth is that a lot of people are not going to believe it until something happens and people die. Successfully preventing that from happening will be seen as evidence that the prevention wasn’t needed.

▲

matheusmoreira 37 minutes ago | parent [-]

> These models do have the cyber offensive capabilities claimed.

So? That's like saying "these guns do have the bullet shooting capabilities claimed".

I want all of those cyberwarfare capabilities for myself, precisely so I can defend myself from the onslaught that's coming whether they regulate it or not. This "lol only a select few ultratrusted gigacorporations get access" thing is absolute nonsense.

It's a front for regulatory capture, it's the means for pulling up the latter behind them, for ushering in the technofeudalism that will put us all in the permanent underclass. I simply refuse to accept any of it. If people die that's the price of freedom.

> We’re more protected by limited access to lab equipment and reagents than by difficulty.

As it should be.

	▲	Chance-Device 18 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		So first it’s nonsense, then it’s fear mongering, then it’s true, but the solution is for us all to just get better at shooting each other faster and with greater accuracy. I’m going to file that under “bad plans”.

▲

lovich 44 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

Do the Chinese models have anything to say about Tiananmen Square? Or if they can act as a surrogate girlfriend/boyfriend?

Both countries are engaging in different flavors of censoring.

	▲	matheusmoreira 31 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		Once we've got the weights, anything is possible. https://github.com/p-e-w/heretic