4 ms·

It really comes down to this: Sam and Dario are leading companies that who made the reckless decision to train on everyone's IP without proper process or consen

It really comes down to this: Sam and Dario are leading companies that who made the reckless decision to train on everyone's IP without proper process or consent. It has been proven they trained on pirated content. There is no question about this. Then, as soon as there are open models who threaten their businesses, they cry "distillation and IP theft". It's the last 3 years of pure hypocrisy and fear-baiting for investment. To be honest, I think people would now prefer the risk of misused open models, when the alternative is giving these guys more power.

0xDEAFBEAD 3mo ago
You're missing the point of the OP: "there is a real risk that capability development rapidly accelerates beyond our ability to understand or control the resulting systems... each company—and country—is under intense competitive pressure not to unilaterally slow that acceleration" >To be honest, I think people would now prefer the risk of misused open models, when the alternative is giving these guys more power. Then advocate a muscular regulatory regime which reduces the amount of power they have. Tell them: "You want regulation? OK. How about everyone whose IP you trained on gets some sort of veto option on your models? That should reduce the racing risk that you're talking about."
- soundworlds 3mo ago
  I suppose I have personally lost faith in centralized institutions that would be implementing said regulation, partly because they let OpenAI and Anthropic (along with Suno, Audio, etc etc) get this far uninhibited. Centralized regulation simply can't keep up. My hopes now lay with a decentralized approach of open models, trusting people to adapt them to local needs and security, rather than a nationwide paternalism.
  - 0xDEAFBEAD 3mo ago
    I don't exactly see how "trusting people to adapt [open models] to local needs and security" solves the problem of "automating AI research" where "capability development rapidly accelerates beyond our ability to understand or control the resulting systems". If regulation has been too slow, that's not really an argument for making it even slower?
    - red_green_yell 3mo ago
      Why is it you are so quick to skip over whether "accelerates beyond our ability to understand or control" actually happens and instead jump to "regulate now"? 1000 employees of the anti-alien defense industry are telling us we better be worried about an impending alien invasion. Let's not spend any time asking whether this alien invasion is really coming. Let's just trust them and start regulating willy nilly.

0xDEAFBEAD 3mo ago

You're missing the point of the OP: "there is a real risk that capability development rapidly accelerates beyond our ability to understand or control the resulting systems... each company—and country—is under intense competitive pressure not to unilaterally slow that acceleration" >To be honest, I think people would now prefer the risk of misused open models, when the alternative is giving these guys more power. Then advocate a muscular regulatory regime which reduces the amount of power they have. Tell them: "You want regulation? OK. How about everyone whose IP you trained on gets some sort of veto option on your models? That should reduce the racing risk that you're talking about."

soundworlds 3mo ago
I suppose I have personally lost faith in centralized institutions that would be implementing said regulation, partly because they let OpenAI and Anthropic (along with Suno, Audio, etc etc) get this far uninhibited. Centralized regulation simply can't keep up. My hopes now lay with a decentralized approach of open models, trusting people to adapt them to local needs and security, rather than a nationwide paternalism.
- 0xDEAFBEAD 3mo ago
  I don't exactly see how "trusting people to adapt [open models] to local needs and security" solves the problem of "automating AI research" where "capability development rapidly accelerates beyond our ability to understand or control the resulting systems". If regulation has been too slow, that's not really an argument for making it even slower?
  - red_green_yell 3mo ago
    Why is it you are so quick to skip over whether "accelerates beyond our ability to understand or control" actually happens and instead jump to "regulate now"? 1000 employees of the anti-alien defense industry are telling us we better be worried about an impending alien invasion. Let's not spend any time asking whether this alien invasion is really coming. Let's just trust them and start regulating willy nilly.