3 ms·
The owner of a thing deciding to whom they wish to provide access to the thing they own, is a necessary consequence of the concept of private property. The onl
by ben_w 4mo ago
The owner of a thing deciding to whom they wish to provide access to the thing they own, is a necessary consequence of the concept of private property.
The only two alternative to a private entity making this decision are a government making this decision, or nobody making this decision, the latter of which is equivalent to both government and a private entity making the decision to do (1).
- akmiller 4mo agoThat's a complete false dichotomy. We create all kinds of consortiums to manage complex decisions that shouldn't be owned by one entity.
- ben_w 4mo agoWhat, you mean like the US AI Safety Institute Consortium which Anthropic is a member of? https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2023/11/02/2023-24216/artificial-intelligence-safety-institute-consortium https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2023/11/02/2023-24... https://www.nist.gov/artificial-intelligence/nist-ai-consortium/nist-ai-consortium-members https://www.nist.gov/artificial-intelligence/nist-ai-consort... Or the Coalition for Secure AI, ditto? https://www.coalitionforsecureai.org/addressing-whats-next-in-securing-enterprise-ai/ https://www.coalitionforsecureai.org/addressing-whats-next-i... Or the Frontier Model Forum, of which they were a founding member? https://www-cdn.anthropic.com/1095a748082bb69e714d1d550713e203b7114166/frontier-model-forum.pdf https://www-cdn.anthropic.com/1095a748082bb69e714d1d550713e2... Consortium are entities, and the CEOs of Anthropic and OpenAI at least are openly begging for feedback with all their efforts to handle this, openly asking everyone else to figure out what the rules ought to be. Even if you think that too is a cynical ploy, they're asking.