Sounds like a pretty strong argument to self host, and otherwise be in charge of the software you use.

Including your AI agents. And models become problematic. There very likely is and/or will be lots of pressure for US AI labs to make models help law enforcement. It could be by implementing backdoors in generated code, or not report some exploitable bugs, or something else. Similar for agents, they basically become the threat in your infra…

(It’s of course not only the US, just that the largest AI providers are US based and we know from history how US agencies operate)

▲

Ancapistani 7 hours ago | parent [-]

Yep.

I'm using open weights models on a privacy-focused provider right now, and that's adequate for my current usage, but I'm rapidly getting to the point where my agent's access level to my data (and to a lesser extent, my accounts) is becoming something I'm not comfortable sending outside my network at all.

My hope is that models that are roughly on par with Deepseek V4 Flash can be run on hardware that I can own for <~$5k in the near future. We're close, but not there yet as far as I know.

The only long-term solution to this is self-hosting.

	▲	johnsmith1840 5 hours ago \| parent [-]
		There is literally no protection or difference of an opensource model doing this. An actual objection I had while talking to an aerospace company was they don't want opensource models because the threat of it having a poisoned training example on specific systems. It's easily the most hidden malware possible, completely undetectable until an exact set of tokens unlocks it. Is it line 100,543 of your security product? You will literally not know until it plants it in there.

▲

otterley 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

How do you think self-hosting will help in this situation?

▲

gloryjulio 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Self host + open weight models, exactly the things that openai/anthropic don't want you to have