3 ms·
> any open-weight self-hosted chinese model might as well have been made by Von der Leyen herself. This is simply wrong. Plenty of security-sensitive companies
by tsimionescu 1mo ago
> any open-weight self-hosted chinese model might as well have been made by Von der Leyen herself.
This is simply wrong. Plenty of security-sensitive companies and agencies disallow the use of any Chinese model out of hand. Given the black box nature of LLMs, the fact that it's "open weight" is irrelevant to the trust calculus, and the fact that it's self hosted barely adds anything.
- Iolaum 1mo agoYes but what about taking an open weight Chinese model and do some extra pre-train and post-train to remove any potential hidden backdoors?
- tsimionescu 1mo agoHow do you confirm that you did enough pre-train and post-train to remove the relevant bias/backdoor? Note that I'm not singling out Chinese models here. The same question and concern should apply to any model you use - in security critical scenarios, you need to ask yourself if you can trust the provider, since the artifact, the model itself, is far too complex to audit and trust. Given most AI companies' ties to the weapons industry and spying apparatus of their host countries, it would be absurd to think that burying some kind of malicious payload in the models has not at least been contemplated, and I would bet it has been at least attempted. We know retrospectively this was the case with many previous technologies (remember the backdoored encryption that the NSA tried for so long to push), so it would be naive to think it's not at least plausible with AI.