The government or OpenAI and Anthrophic?

Because if you mean the Government, I think they frankly just care whoever is paying them to make an executive order or worse a law paid by corporations to not only block, but ideally also ANHILIATE ANY POTENTIAL COMPETITION.

It's the ultimatum against the small guys. Sold as "Anti-China", when in reality it's only purpose is total dependency to corporations by law.

▲

solenoid0937 43 minutes ago | parent [-]

The support of OSS models on HN just days after finding out about the message board incident is so bizarre to me.

Do you guys really not comprehend the impact of giving every script kiddie an Astra-equivalent model to play with, this time without any guardrails whatsoever?

Cause I'm starting to think you aren't really thinking through the impact of power plants, hospitals, etc all being hacked en masse. People will die.

Or making it easy for anyone to make a virus (it's not hard, mechanically). Even more people will die.

Taking this to the extreme: You don't just give every kid a "do anything" super intelligent button. Open source models have a limited lifespan whether you like it or not, for the safety of all of us as a whole.

▲

EyeEmOe a few seconds ago | parent | next [-]

So long as real logistics systems are isolated and secured what real risk to stable society is there?

Your use of the internet may lead you to greatly overestimate the number of people who take what they read online as real. More people than you think treat this shit, regardless of the website/forum, like Jerry Springer and Satuday Night Live; just entertainment.

The STEM crowd often overthinks the impact of violating their pet theory.

Can an LLM escape its computer entirely and stomp through a city center like a kaiju? Settle down.

You're veering towards thought policing over speculation.

▲

CamperBob2 36 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

The support of OSS models on HN just days after finding out about the message board incident is so bizarre to me.

Other sites beckon.

▲

solenoid0937 32 minutes ago | parent [-]

Yes, I'm aware that the HN majority is a hyper-libertarian echo chamber that loves to outsource the problem of "technology hurting regular people" if it means they get to keep their toys/investments.

After all, who cares if abliterated extremely intelligent OSS models result in actual innocent people dying? That's <insert group here> problem. We need to be able to generate our uncensored furry fanfics, goddamnit!

▲

llukas 14 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

State actors, professional criminals will have same or better capabilities and do not hesitate to use them. On defense end we'll have only "pay bigcorp" option.

OSS models can help to fix infra especially for folks who would never do it themselves. We do not know yet what final effect would be and it doesn't seem sky is falling now or in near future.

"people dying and furry fanfics" is a scarecrow and distractor respectively, it would be awesome if more specific examples would be used in place.

	▲	solenoid0937 9 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		> State actors, professional criminals will have same or better capabilities State actors do but they are not unhinged enough to use this to cause massive loss of life, unlike random crazy people with access to a computer. Professional criminals don't have access. Please explain exactly how you expect a professional criminal to get access to a non-safety-tuned Astra/Fable equivalent. > OSS models can help to fix infra You can work with the vendors of critical software to fix infra first, without giving every random crazy person access to something that creates cyber/bioweapons. > "people dying and furry fanfics" is a scarecrow You don't think people will die if OSS models make it easy to create a bioweapon, or make it easy to hack hospitals, infrastructure, and the like? Please explain your thinking. It's very easy to order all of the raw material needed to create a virus, the challenge is in making a viable one. But models make this easy. Same for cyber. Hospitals, emergency services, and infrastructure like power plants are not sufficiently hardened to withstand an attack from Fable-class models.

▲

shwaj 3 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

The risks of open models are real.

However, I’d feel better about ceding control of AI to the government if they didn’t seem so intent on building an apparatus for surveillance/control.

Your “furry fanfic” is a somewhat pathetic scarecrow; this is a complicated topic.

▲

Aspos 38 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

Is this "think of the children, think of the hospitals" argument? Really?

▲

solenoid0937 35 minutes ago | parent [-]

Meaningless phrase used to dismiss arguments, please engage with the actual argument.

I don't think you understand how bad it will be if anyone has a button that can hack anything, our infrastructure is not ready for this. Actual people will die. Do you just not get this?

Bioweapons as well. Do you not understand how easy it is to craft a virus at home? You can literally order everything you need online. Again, actual people will die.

You are arguing the equivalent of letting everyone own missile launchers or RPGs because "open source good."

▲

Aspos 27 minutes ago | parent [-]

If and I mean IF it will be a (A) "hack anything" button, it as well will be a (B) "find a vuln in my site" button too. And a (C) "harden my site" too. And limiting such buttons to a few corporations does not make any sense because script-kiddies will still have access to (A).

▲

solenoid0937 25 minutes ago | parent [-]

Did you know (C) is possible without causing mass chaos that results in many people dying? In ways that don't give every script kiddie access to (A, B)?

It turns out you can give defenders the opportunity to front-run, at least on the most critical and widely used infrastructure.

Same with bio risks.

▲

Aspos 20 minutes ago | parent [-]

No, that's an illusion, that's the thing. You can't physically have (C) without the (A). Large corporations will spend billions trying to convince the population it is somehow possible, but the reality is different.

▲

solenoid0937 15 minutes ago | parent [-]

You absolutely can have (C) without widespread (A), you just need to limit the audience that gets the tools, and in fact the big labs are already engaging in (C) in collaboration with the government and vendors of critical software.

That you don't have access to (C) to harden your blog is a non-issue from a societal perspective, hardening the software that our infrastructure relies on first is simply more important.

	▲	Aspos 4 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		Limiting progress by letting only select corporations access the stuff is how you fall behind China, UAE and in a few years even Kazakhstan. Whoever wants to have access to (A) will have it, but letting only few select corporations provide (C) will mean majority will be priced out of (C). Are you a shill or something?