3 ms·
He has also been telling bald-faced lies about open source/open weights models that are easily disproved. For example, he claimed that they lack the collaborati
by anon373839 4mo ago
He has also been telling bald-faced lies about open source/open weights models that are easily disproved. For example, he claimed that they lack the collaborative benefits of open source because "we can't see inside the model".
Open weights models are responsible for enabling reams of research on interpretability methods that do just that. And they have facilitated so much collaboration on architecture, inference optimizations, training and steering methods, and other topics that were completely out of reach with closed models like Anthropic's. It's really staggering to me.
- andsoitis 4mo agoDoesn’t this seem true / self-evident: “His warns that once powerful models are released openly, companies lose the ability to monitor misuse, revoke access, or update safety guardrails.”
- anon373839 4mo agoThe premise (that "powerful models" implicate "safety" concerns that must be controlled by "companies") does not seem true or self-evident to me. This tired fearmongering campaign centered on GPT-4 three years ago, a model now surpassed by open models that run on laptops. Did fearmongers like Amodei say, "Oops, we were wrong! It wasn't that dangerous after all"? No. Of course they didn't.
- regularfry 4mo agoEither 1) the company has device-level control to the degree that they can not only restrict which API endpoints people can connect to but which accounts they use to do so (in which case this already isn't an issue); or 2) they don't, and all bets are off anyway, open weights or not.