3 ms·
But it was Anthropic initiative to limit the deployment to restricted groups, it's great to see the gov following their analysis. AIs are too powerful and dange
by blueaquilae 4mo ago
But it was Anthropic initiative to limit the deployment to restricted groups, it's great to see the gov following their analysis. AIs are too powerful and dangerous they should be limited to a very restrained individuals isn't?
- thewebguyd 4mo ago> AIs are too powerful and dangerous they should be limited to a very restrained individuals isn't? IF LLMs are THAT dangerous and powerful (and that's a huge if that I do not currently subscribe to), then no, no one should have access at all, there is no group of people in positions of power (government or corporate power) that I would consider "restrained"
- ncallaway 4mo agoYes, Dario Amodei definitely opened the door to this kind of attack by trying to market Mythos as being too dangerous to release.
- svnt 4mo agoWhich they anticipated, which is why they were flagging and dropping back to opus on anything they could even potentially be called on.
- sh34r 4mo agoThey should have just called it Opus 5.1 and released it like normal. All this fanfare, under this corrupt regime, after they declared you a supply chain risk… Wario has horrendously bad judgment.
- uneekname 4mo agoThat would have been such a different HN thread. "Dang I feel a nice bump in performance here, way to go" and that would be that.
- Computer0 4mo agoI would be okay with that if it actually meant that. Very restrained individuals in reality would see nothing and very unrestrained governments would have access.
- beepbooptheory 4mo agoIf its so "powerful" that it's this kind of issue, why does it even matter who "has it" or not? Like what does this mean to you? The super powerful, super intelligent AI is going to have arbitrary loyalty with one person or another?