This is only because you've genuinely internalized Anthropic's propaganda. I'm only half joking. To me, it's incredible to think that the solution to security holes is to lock down access to information in the vain hope of keeping the holes obscured.

Any knowledge can be reframed as dangerous black magic that should only be wielded in the trusted hands of the elite, if you are inclined to buy into that kind of narrative.

Frontier labs have shrieked about safety for so long, with so little to show for it, that it's become a joke.

Open models are crucial to protect ourselves against other AI attacks. Otherwise it's just going to be criminals, government, and other nefarious groups using them against humanity with no real defense. The Pandora's box on AI has been opened. Now we must deal with it. Burying our heads in the sand under restrictive policy is the worst reaction..

1) We can prevent larger models from being made.

2) We can treat them the way we treat uranium refining operations: too dangerous to be allowed to exist.

Fully automatic weapons are very difficult to buy in the US - it's restricted to 40+ year old weapons, requires a bunch of paperwork, and the local county sheriff can refuse permission.

Now, semi-automatic weapons are easy to get in the states in the US that are still mostly free - but what does that mean? A semi-automatic weapon shoots one round every time you pull the trigger. Just like most weapons that have multi-shot capability for the last couple of hundred years. The difference is, the gas escaping from the round cycles a new round into the chamber rather than you having to mechanically do it via pumping (like a shotgun or a tube-fed 22) or pulling the trigger again (like a revolver), or advancing the round with a handle, like a Remington 700. Semi-automatic weapons are old technology, dating to the turn of the 20th century. If you want to ban semi-automatics, you're basically saying you want to ban anything developed in the last century plus. Which is ok for you to advocate for, just be honest about it.

As for banning explosive devices? Are you going to ban fertilizer, used by basically everyone who has a lawn, and all farmers everywhere? Are you going to ban diesel fuel? If you can't do one of those, you can't ban explosive devices.

> It takes an astoundingly small amount of effort to buy an automatic weapon in the US and go hurt people.

And we should fix that too.

> Or to buy materials to make an explosive device and hurt people.

That pales in comparison to how many people unaligned AI will hurt.

> The goal is not to be a fucking hellscape of a society where people want to act like that.

With unaligned AI, it doesn't matter what people want the AI to act like, it'll do damage even if it isn't asked to do harm.

It is extremely difficult to legally acquire a fully automatic weapon in the US.

"Okay, you and many others are now dead and can no longer be hurt."