Meh - I am skeptical of the entire “safety” fear mongering. Every time our rights are restricted, it is under calls for some kind of “safety”. And there is a wh

Meh - I am skeptical of the entire “safety” fear mongering. Every time our rights are restricted, it is under calls for some kind of “safety”. And there is a whole ecosystem of activists and industrialists to bolster the same message - that somehow the sharing of information (which is what LLM models are) or excessive calculations / thoughts are a problem. There are many reasons to distrust Sam Altman or OpenAI - for example that the models are closed. But “safety” isn’t one of them for me. Regarding industrialists and their motivations around safety: Amazon and Meta recently joined Microsoft, Google, Anthropic, and OpenAI as part of the “Frontier Model Forum” industry group, AKA the group for regulatory capture by playing up “trust and safety”. They are the ones pushing for regulations which will potentially make it illegal to build models that are open or uncensored. This whole group has a dystopian vibe to it, with forced assumptions for its members: “Member firms must publicly acknowledge that frontier AI models pose both public safety and societal risks, and publicly disclose guidelines for evaluating and mitigating those risks.” In other words, all the members must amplify the same safety tropes to force regulation on the rest of us. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2023/jul/26/google-microsoft-openai-anthropic-ai-frontier-model-forum https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2023/jul/26/google-mi... https://www.frontiermodelforum.org/updates/amazon-and-meta-join-the-frontier-model-forum-to-promote-ai-safety/ https://www.frontiermodelforum.org/updates/amazon-and-meta-j...