| ▲ | mrcwinn 4 hours ago | |
So, if an open weights model was found to be very dangerous, what - just too bad? One could, of course, design an open safety protocol, written and performed by people in the executive branch, accountable to an elected official. I love how remarkably inconsistent this community is. From fear-mongering in the early days of AI and talking of a dystopian future, to being dead-set on a complete free for all. (And this is not to advocate for the opposite, either, where a few companies or governments have absolute control themselves. But surely an arms race is not the answer.) | ||
| ▲ | cogman10 3 hours ago | parent [-] | |
> So, if an open weights model was found to be very dangerous, what - just too bad? Yeah, it's too bad. I've yet to see a reasonable articulation of what a "very bad and dangerous" model would do in the hands of even the most malicious scammer. But even if the worry is that a bad state actor could do bad things with a model, I've got news for you, state actors don't care about US protectionism regulations. They'll just download the models and run them. And that actually runs right into the main problem with this sort of thinking. Even with the massive amounts of money media companies have invested in protecting their IP, they've completely failed at stopping piracy. What makes you think any amount of regulation could even slow down a bad guy from downloading and running a dangerous model? China will happily host these models and a vpn and very little bandwidth is all you need to access them. Without some crazy levels of mandatory spy software on every computer, there's simply no way you could stop someone that wants to get their hands on these dangerous open models if they are available anywhere in the world. Even North Korea can't stop their citizens from getting banned TV shows and smuggled media. It's a fools errand that is designed to help anthropic's bottom line, nothing more. | ||