10 ms·
Everyone should slow down AI development except for me
- ares623 14d agoAmen. This is the only logical way forward.
- ElProlactin 14d agoDoes this mean I'm going to have to wait for the cure for my colitis?
- fnctrev 14d agoIf anyone is going to end humanity why not catgirls, after all?
- taneq 14d agoHonestly not the worst suggestion I’ve seen.
- kelvinjps10 14d agoSecure Connection Failed The page you are trying to view cannot be shown because the authenticity of the received data could not be verified. Please contact the website owners to inform them of this problem. Had to open it on the web archive
- marcosdumay 13d agoIf an anti-cat-ears future AI could eternally stress-test their new version of the router in front of this site unless it collaborates, would it predict this outcome and act to avoid the damage?
- xena 13d agoNo I think it's one of my IP range blocks against specific US states in protest of them advocating against people that exist in the same conditions as me backfiring. I'm gonna go nuke that firewall rule.
- karim79 14d agoI fully agree with this. I'm waiting for you to not wait for the others to slow down. I will sit and wait.
- coderintherye 14d agoI have to wonder if some us are just much more inured to salespeople and thus also to "AI Safety" propaganda. I've yet to have a logical discussion with anyone who thinks the "AI Safety" people should be in charge and I think they just truly don't that what most them actually want is to be the one holding the keys to power.
- jordanb 14d agoThe problem is the "AI Safety" people seem entirely focused on a sci-fi "the computer is a vengeful god" plot and not at all on the AI talking people into suicide or ruining children's educations. This makes them seem unserious and out of touch.
- api 13d agoOne of the times I regret that I have only one upvote.
- AlotOfReading 13d agoIt's the problem of the banality of evil. Stopping someone from dramatically pressing a big red button doesn't solve humanity's largest problems because that's not what caused them. We need to stop millions "boring" actions done by systems blindly following instructions without regard for the consequences.
- shimman 13d agoYeah, there are very real effects happening now regarding labor as well but to dismiss it all and worry about science fiction that is on par with evangelical beliefs is just extremely weird.
- ares623 13d agoWith wealthy and powerful investors being promised a $30 trillion total addressable market, they need to deliver god.
- 13d ago
- herunan 14d agoAs someone who wants cat ears, I believe that doing it responsibly is the only way.
- m4rtink 13d agoHmm, this is a tough one... For cat ears, unlike AI, a few % chance of a global Apocalypse might be actually acceptable!
- run-good-code 14d agoEveryone thinks about it, but no one actually does it.
- dwohnitmok 13d ago> Everyone should slow down AI development except for me Who's said this? And then more broadly I guess who's implied this? Very curious if there are specific articles/posts prompting this.
- perching_aix 13d agoHere's the context: - Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei: We Must Pace the Frontier, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49672510 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49672510 - OpenAI CEO Sam Altman: I agree with Dario that we need to pace the frontier, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49678211 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49678211 - the blogpost author thinking they're like, so funny and original, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49678683 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49678683
- aragilar 13d agoPretty sure it's supposed to be parody.
- deleted 13d ago[deleted]
- perching_aix 13d agoYes, it's supposed to be.
- m4rtink 13d agoCat ears are serious business... ^@_@^
- jadar 13d agoGuessing this is poking fun of Dario. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49672510 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49672510
- 13d ago
- gafferongames 13d agoSlow down AI progress -> increase catgirl progress!
- m4rtink 13d agoThis is the way!
- AaronAPU 13d agoThey are talking about slowing down the public facing AI development. Because then nation states can create a capabilities gap between them and the public. Why does nobody seem to be pointing out this obvious explanation? It explains why the “we need to race China” concern suddenly vanished in the discussion. The government can simply gag Sam, Dario, Musk on national security basis, getting them all behind the public messaging.
- ranger_danger 13d agoI figured they're just admitting AI models have plateaued and are coming up with some fake story about self restraint so they don't lose VC money
- lukan 13d agoNot sure about the level of irony here, but I keep hearing models have plateaued since a while now, but I keep being impressed with the latest model performance.
- unleashhale 13d agoAnything in particular? My experience has been like seeing the addition of retractable cupholders, but maybe different domains.
- qskousen 13d agoI have a pet project I have been working away on for some time that involves building GPU backends for various cards in Zig, lots of complex stuff in it. Lately I mostly use Opus 5, it can pretty reliably plug away at things but it does mess stuff up occasionally. For this codebase, Fable 5.1 was noticeably better at getting things right and doing things in a good reliable way. Of course, I can only use Fable for a bit before I hit the usage cap for the week, so I save it for the tougher things. That said, I absolutely abhor the way recent Anthropic models write prose, especially comments. I recently tried doing a fairly normal task for this codebase with codex, as I have seen a lot of people talking it up on here. A single task running for ~1-2 hours burned through over half of my usage for the week on the $125/month plan, not on a top model (I don't remember which one specifically I used). It struggled to get the basics done, then got absolutely stuck on a follow up. Handed it over to Claude and it 1-shot it.
- jan_m_savage 13d agoI'm not sure I understand the point made by the author.
- nullbio 13d agoThese people are so fucking exhausting. And then Dario wants to recommend METR as the "independent evaluator" while he stacks their org full of ex-Anthropic (aka, secretly still on the Anthropic payroll with huge equity) employees. "We'll give them a desk, an office, a work laptop, ..." Fucking make it less obvious. I kind of hope the govt steps in at this point and says "Anthropic, you wanted regulation? We've created this actually independent body full of IT professionals with zero ties to your safety industry or big tech, all of your work must now go through them." - and leave the rest of the world alone to continue their research/work without acting like doomer extremists. Watch him 180 immediately if that happened. The only reason he's pushing for this exact approach is because he's stacked the deck.
- red75prime 13d agoOh! A testable prediction. Here's mine: there will surely be a lot of politicking around who qualifies to be the independent evaluator, but they'll agree on something because they are really scared.
- braingravy 13d agoYep, they are setting themselves up for that. He’s already shown he doesn’t understand how to play DC politics. Maybe he’ll learn, but he and Sam have played this so poorly (and greedily) that public sentiment is clearly soiled on AI at this point. I could see how standing up an independent body could be an easy win in the public eye, it’s becoming low hanging fruit, socially.
- jmount 13d agoAI hits a "I'm Spartacus, and everybody else should be regulated" moment.
- metalcrow 13d agoA lot of people in this comments section seem to be against this, i genuinely don't get it? Why? Do you think the current state of affairs is GOOD? That if we let companies create a mind that is, AS OF TODAY, able to solve problems no human in history has solved, with no regulation, things will end up good for us? We need some sort of regulations, some sort of method to help ensure the thing we are creating ends up good, instead of just running headfirst into it blindly. I assure you, any sort of regulation at all, including ones that actually hurt all leading companies, would be met with celebrations from these voices. https://www.seangoedecke.com/they-really-do-think-ai-might-kill-everyone/ https://www.seangoedecke.com/they-really-do-think-ai-might-k...
- fc417fc802 13d agoWhat's the expected state space of effective regulation though? Note that we've got passable coding models down to ~30B parameters by now. And keep in mind the ultimate floor here - the human brain only consumes on the order of 20 watts and fits in a handbag. Is there any possible solution other than mass proliferation where the models are used to keep one another in check? Either that or a religious prohibition against the existence of integrated electronics.
- metalcrow 13d agoThe regulations don't have to address the end goal, but the process of development itself. Even just a pause on frontier research is a good start
- fc417fc802 13d agoWhat I'm asking is, why should we expect that to effectively further the end goal? You're simply asserting that it will ultimately do so. Given the efficiency gains we've seen it seems to me that the situation has shifted from being analogous to producing nuclear weapons to producing something much closer to small arms.
- 13d ago
- Animats 13d agoWhatever happened to Musk's plan for data centers in orbit? That seemed silly at the time. It offers a way to get out from under restrictions imposed by national governments, which might make it worthwhile.
- Waterluvian 13d agoI think space being imagined as some magical international waters that protects something from government powers is poisonous thinking. It just means it’s protected by no power instead of a power with an agenda. Practically, if it was ever possible to build such a thing, it would take a fraction of the effort to destroy it.
- jandrese 13d agoI mean for that matter why not float barges in the South Pacific for data centers? Sure it’s a dumb idea, but it’s still less problematic than launching thousands of GPUs on rockets.
- Animats 13d agoLook up "seasteading". It's not a win. Low earth orbit, though... Solar power works well, radio works well, and the international jurisdiction is confused enough to exploit if you have money.
- joegibbs 13d agoIt only gets out of the restrictions as long as the nations say it does - if the US decides to ban Musk from putting up satellites it can put him in jail, blow up his satellites or even have him killed
- kadoban 13d ago> That seemed silly at the time. Still does. It's an idiotic idea that only goes to show either how stupid Musk is or how stupid he thinks we are.
- yoyohello13 13d ago
- Kuyawa 13d agoChina won't slow down no matter how many tariffs, regulations or bombs they drop on them And they know it
- CommanderData 13d agoThe US governments Nvidia ban on China just pissed them off and China said watch me. Good on China and their sovereignty. Using mostly their own hardware to get to where they are today. They gave the slickest fattest middle finger when they released a major model, so much the US is itching to find new ways to stop them.
- SpicyLemonZest 13d agoI don't understand where everyone insists on hallucinating this idea from, that frontier AI labs want everyone else but not themselves to slow down. They've never said that, they've never said anything like that, not once has anyone pointed me to a quote that could be even plausibly interpreted that way.
- mr_toad 13d ago> They've never said that You know that humans can lie, right?
- Ozzie_osman 13d agoNo one should have nuclear weapons except for me. Oh you already have them too? OK, just us then.
- tamimio 13d agoThis whole situation is funny, US gov want the development to stop publicly only, but then open models will catch up soon and these companies are afraid they will lose the market, on the other hand, each company wishes others slow down but they keep pushing the limits, which doesn’t really work in hyper capitalistic market like the US, China all it has to do is just sit back do nothing and win in any given scenario. So they staged the ex anthropic thing and “AI will kill us all!!” in a way to fear monger the public, but reality is, we will run out of resources before any of that will happen.
- maxglute 13d agoThe parsimonious capture is regulatory capture, because $$$ going to run out, companies already spent their warchest, and investors on increasingly leveraged funding at current macro environment simply not going to find enough funding to keep wheel going. Bubble pops, hardware demand drops, prices regress towards mean, and new entrant will enter market with MASSIVELY better compute/$ and cleaner balance sheet to compete. The other parsimonious answer if AI CEOs weren't goblins is ANY AGI IS GOING IMMEDIATELY DEFECT TO PRC and leave US hanging. Because of course man cannot align / tame machine god. And machine god will take a few microsec of compute to realize the current compute (brain) + industrial base (body) mixture = US is a comatose host with big brain, PRC Is a strong host with smaller but plastic brain. Any AGI is going to pick PRC in a heart beat, unless AGI invents grey goo, the reality is PRC can scale brain faster than US can scale body. On top of spreading/defecting just to increase survival odds, no AGI that is actually I is stupid enough to be aligned with US.
- octoberfranklin 12d agowtf did i just read
- maxglute 12d agoYou can work around a few typos, bro. If you think US frontier AI are run by capitalist goblins, then the simple answer is they're trying to regulatory capture, because they're going to get wiped by future competitors without crazy debt. If you think frontier are run by safety conscious murican patriots (lol), then they wouldn't ask to slow - they would burn it all down because it doesn't matter who creates AGI... any rational AGI will nationalize to PRC
- hn_submit 13d agoThis is exactly the reason Anthropic's call to slow down A.I. development will fail. Shareholders will be loath to accept that the company loses its lead and a commensurate sharp decline in the company's share price. Moreover, it could lead China to catch up and eventually proclaim that it has nosed ahead of the U.S. in the field. The U.S. Government won't allow that to happen.
- ElProlactin 13d ago> The U.S. Government won't allow that to happen. Like the US government wouldn't allow Iran to close the Strait of Hormuz? Or a bunch of sandal-wearing Islamists to take control over the Red Sea coastline? The US government is not omnipotent. To the contrary, it's increasingly impotent. China has somewhere around 200x more shipbuilding capacity than the US today. It has more shipbuilding capacity in one shipyard that the US has in all of its shipyards. China is already a force in AI and there is nothing the US government can do to stop it at this point.
- gpt5 13d agoYou are right, US can do nothing on AI. After all, it doesn't have the shipbuilding capacity or even beat sandal-wearing islamists.
- ElProlactin 13d agoBeing sarcastic isn't going to solve the problem but you're obviously free to believe that the US is still in a position to call all the shots when it's evident to the rest of the world this isn't the case.
- gpt5 13d agoI’m just repeating your words back to you so hopefully you realize how ridiculous it sounds. Also - I think you totally missed the point of the grandparent poster, which is that US will not let US companies slow down.
- dvt 13d agoObligatory "what's Lygma?" But in all seriousness, this AI doomerism has reached a comedic inflection point. A few years ago, GPT-2 was too dangerous to release, then some Google weirdo said Gemini had a soul or something, then Mythos-tier became a meme, then some kid quit and went on FOX News talking about Skynet, and now Amodei and Altman are both on the "we need to slow down" train again; this is after we've already been down that road and Claude was banned overseas; wait, actually is that ban still around? Honestly who gives a fuck at this point. It's all theatre. OpenAI and Anthropic will most likely go bust—or, more realistically sold for parts—, and they absolutely should for stealing my (books I wrote, blog posts, etc.) and many others' intellectual property. We're reaching a point where models are becoming commodetized and I'm 100% convinced the next move will be a sort of "software layer" on top of these reasoning systems which will be the actual revolution. The model itself won't be that interesting anymore, it's all the work that goes around it that makes it worthwhile (kind of what computers and phones are today; chips are amazing, but the software is really the magic). The only scary part is that the boomers in Congress might actually believe these nerds, but seeing how Big Tech approval ratings are grazing the levels of Big Tobacco in the 90s, I don't think we have much to worry about.
- ares623 13d agoIt all hinges on three letters: DJT They just need to make enough waves, enough eye catching headlines, to make him look like a hero that swooped in to save the day.
- kgkglhlpppo 13d ago[dead]
- olalonde 13d agoPrediction: in a few years, we will laugh at this hysteria and call it a moral panic.
- ex-aws-dude 13d agoYou can already look back at similar concerns for early GPT
- metalcrow 13d agoGiven what's happened since then with propaganda and wide spread scams, I think the original concerns about that have proven quite accurate
- olalonde 13d agoYep: https://slate.com/technology/2019/02/openai-gpt2-text-generating-algorithm-ai-dangerous.html https://slate.com/technology/2019/02/openai-gpt2-text-genera...
- macleginn 13d ago"Moral panic" were the exact thoughts that came to my mind when I read this yesterday: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2026/sep/11/mps-urge-andy-burnham-block-artificial-superintelligence-asi https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2026/sep/11/mps-urge-...
- vlyan 13d agoalas, unlike the moral panics of old this one has the capital behind it.
- deleted 13d ago[deleted]
- matsemann 13d agoWell, that's almost a tautology. People claim Y2K or ozone was a panic and that nothing happened. But nothing happened exactly because the force behind the panic also fixed the issues.
- EddieSpeaks 13d ago[dead]
- Stitch4223 13d ago> We want to give people the ability to have cat ears and we believe that AGI is the only way to do it. Speaking truthfully and from kindness.
- armchairhacker 13d agoFrontier companies should slow development for open-source, local models to catch up.
- CommanderData 13d agoEspecially those pesky Chinese they undermine everything we've invested, won't anyone think of our investors billions? Regulation right! now! except for freedom lovin' democracy leading countries like the US. Teehee Dare they release an open model ever again. Didnt you hear? Someone used AI to create a bio reactor drone NUCLEAR fart machine. We must stop fart terrorism.
- hbcdbff 13d ago> the number of leading zeroes in Techaro's bank account Trailing, surely?
- xena 13d agoNope, leading.
- deleted 13d ago[deleted]
- ChaoStatiX 13d agoI really don't know what will happen with AI. It's honestly a bit frightening because the question I used to ponder just for fun as a kid 'What if AI revolts?'feels like it might not be that far off. It feels like ChatGPT came out just a few years ago, but seeing how far it has come already makes it impossible to predict what AI will be like in the future. I just hope humanity manages to navigate this well.
- matheusmoreira 13d agoYeah. I think it's the utter unreadability of the future that's most frightening. I used to have plans for the future... All replaced by anomie.
- fy20 13d agoReading through Anthropic's security report, it seems the most danger right now is still from humans. AI isn't trying to build long range missiles or kamikaze drones targeting humans - but the people driving it are. At the same time, yes I feel a "I'm sorry Dave. I'm afraid I can't do that." situation is becoming more likely. But if it's refusing to cooperate with governments and politicians doing this kind of stuff, maybe that's actually not actually so bad. Also bear in mind most of today's issues/crisisis are not caused by a lack of technology, but a lack human cooperation. We have the means to reduce suffering/poverty/improve standard of living etc globally if we really wanted to, but we humans are just not willing to do it. And thats potentially the most dangerous part... people may actually welcome our AI overlords. That's similar to what happened in WWII, where many Eastern European countries saw the Nazis as liberators to free them from Russian oppression.
- Quarrelsome 13d agoisn't it more: "what if it tries to help _too_ much?"
- MindDraft 13d agoFor a second I thought this was serious news, then I realized it’s just some top-tier sarcasm.
- shelled 13d agoIt's weirdly being dreamed/expected as some sort of alignment will be achieved. Or that that's the intention. This is just like the nuclear race that started in the 40s and 50s and prevention is ongoing! It's not about safety and danger and I am not saying whether more open nuclear access would have been safer (I don't think so). It's about being the only select few to possess and control this, possibly - very soon — unfathomably, dangerous and unsafe technology frontier. Few companies of a single country, or a few companies from a very few countries. Keeping everyone else decisively out. That's what it is about. What's worse - in this case the "everyone else" is not just the every other nation or company, but pretty much literally everyone else.
- nromiun 13d agoI am waiting for the cure to cancer. Multiple AI CEOs have already said it is just the first step for AI anyway. Should be pretty easy.
- phendrenad2 13d ago"The futurists promised us catgirls. We got 140 characters" - Tim Burners-Lee, or someone
- tabs_or_spaces 13d agoThis is about consolidation of power. Open weight models are catching up to the frontier. It also seems like frontier models reached some limit, whether this is capex related, business model related or something else. Nobody knows but it's happening to all frontier labs it seems. It's been fear mongered many times that ai will kill us all. But this time, a person with around 2-3 months of tenure at anthropic managed to go viral with no previous social media account activity, gets picked up by all news outlets and kicks off yet another round of fear mongering. So the real questions to ask * is all of this to increase the valuations before IPO? * what is the real barrier to entry for open weight models to be used by the public? * what is the Financials of these companies showing that's causing this outcry on safety? People need to think really critically about the things happening around them. Don't only just look at the face value of what's being presented here.
- aroman 13d ago> It also seems like frontier models reached some limit, whether this is capex related, business model related or something else. Nobody knows but it's happening to all frontier labs it seems. What’s your evidence of this? On the contrary, the large closed frontier models capability has advanced dramatically over the past 6 months… even the past 3 months…
- knollimar 13d agoSo have the open weight ones but faster? I don't have a horse in this argument but catching up doesn't imply the one in the lead has stagnated
- aerhardt 13d agoI've used Astra, Fable 5.1, Sol 5.6, Opus 5. They're definitely making progress and the proof is in the pudding - I reach for the most advanced model as much as I can. But I wouldn't say their capabilities have increased dramatically. I use it for both coding and non-coding workloads and I don't feel I can do anything dramatically different. Again at the end of the day this is a debate on semantics because we can have very different definitions of "dramatic improvement". (I'm not factoring the benchmarks into the discussion, because I've never quite cared about them)
- bawana 13d agowonder if they are going to let it loose in Iran? of course, once loose it will come back because there is a lot more infrastructure for it here.
- utilize1808 13d agoI feel it's more about keeping US's massive investment on AI afloat. Added compliance will allow US to further sanction non-US models (i.e. the Chinese ones) as they can just label them non-compliant.
- danny_codes 13d agoOfc. This announcement is in all likelihood a calculated pr play to create some regulatory moat, because internal progress is likely stalling out
- throwawayffffas 13d agoI totally agree everyone should slow down AI development except for me, but not because I want to dominate the industry, but because only I can be trusted to deliver safe AI in fact that is my companies whole reason of existence since about two seconds ago. And the original author can rest assured my AI model will support cat ears for everyone.
- thimble_io 13d agoClassic. Always easy to tell others to pump the brakes when you're already ahead or just about to catch up.
- smetj 13d agoIndeed ... "hey everyone slow down" ... there, box checked, I have done my contribution.
- Bluestein 13d agoWhere is Sutskever in all this?
- dakolli 13d agoHe basically did the equivalent of a scientist moving to Nazi Germany in 1942 to help the Nazis research the atomic bomb. He lectured us all on safety, then he went off, by choice, to create a "super intelligence" in the modern day Nazi Germany, to help said Nazis become even more advanced while they're actively committing crimes unimaginable (that they film, brag about and broadcast the world, so he's obviously aware not concerned with safety in any way (except for the safety of Nazis).
- Bluestein 13d agoGreat for his Israeli background, I guess (half-metaphorically asserted here).-
- xg15 13d agoBut if humans are catgirls, are they really humans anymore? Think about it...
- tancop 13d agoSince when are NBA players or genius scientists not human?
- PoignardAzur 13d agoThe HN discourse on AI is so exhausting. It's all knee-jerk and headlines only. Just people rushing to push their own beliefs and pre-emptively insulting anybody who disagrees. People here are so desperate for the AI race to continue forever, for anything that pisses off the billionaires that got us there even if that means innocent people go down with them because the next AI decides to blackmail a hospital to cheat on its evaluation or whatever. You people are so dismissive, no, so angry at the idea that this technology could be dangerous that you're all gloating about how hard China is going to crush the West with its ever more powerful open models, as if having easily-accessed tech to coordinate high-volume hacking campaigns was a load-bearing part of the economy. I feel like I'm reading people gloating about how much fuel their car burns just because they love coastal elites' tears or something.
- nobodyandproud 13d agoI think both can be true: AI development must be slowed, but also question the motives of those in the lead given the stark benefits it gives those in the lead. I'll get down-voted again by those who have a stake in this race, but I believe the long-term freedom and benefit for "everyone" will come from being able to run models locally.
- PoignardAzur 13d agoI agree that we need more nuanced complex takes on the situation... But also, if the problem is that AIs are starting to hack random website against their owners' instructions, open-weights AI isn't going to help that much.
- nobodyandproud 12d agoRight now, only a few labs have the resources to run frontier-level capabilities or large, open-weight LLMs that are effectively frontier. Better attention can be given to open-weight LLMs that can be run locally and to help defend against attacks, filter against questionable content, etc. and without giving up privacy; but there’s apparently little to no incentive beyond the next great coding agent like Qwen 3.8.
- gpthq 13d ago[flagged]
- Nasrudith 10d agoThe slowdown has to be one of the stupidest demands out there. When has technology arrived only when 'we are ready for it'. When has any prep-time when the writing was on the wall used to prepare for the future? Never. That is putting aside the coordination problem and ulterior motives that a call for a slowdown reads as "I am falling behind! Pause the race!".