Also the concern that open weights models could contain dormant adversarial behavior (i.e. they are sleeper agents) is more popular amongst decision makers than one would think.

In that regard it was a clever marketing move by Anthropic to release their paper "Sleeper Agents: Training Deceptive LLMs that Persist Through Safety Training" ....

Well, they do. So you review the output. Models should be treated as juniors, not a line of code or legalese they write should be used without review by a human, not another AI.

> In that regard it was a clever marketing move by Anthropic to release their paper "Sleeper Agents: Training Deceptive LLMs that Persist Through Safety Training" ....

I find such claims a bit like if 3M/DuPont released a paper on the carcinogen dangers of PFAS and someone said this was "a clever marketing move".

Like, great, this can have hidden dangers we only learn about years after it's irreversible… how does this make "our"* companies the good guys?

A lot of us were already concerned about backdoors mandated by the US government, but that was just encryption and this is everything that AI ends up being able to do.

* in the sense of "the G7" until the start of this year, because why would other nations prefer us over China in the first place, and thanks to Trump vs. Canada, Greenland, Iceland also now the rest of the G7 has to treat seriously the possibility that the US is more of an expansionist threat than China is.

I love how Anthropic has created Frankensteins monster security wise and then pointing at it and yelling "DANGEROUS" haha