3 ms·

Except that so far, it is literally these labs that are the biggest threat and the least willing/capable to restrain those models. And the same penalties apply

by watwut 1mo ago

Except that so far, it is literally these labs that are the biggest threat and the least willing/capable to restrain those models. And the same penalties apply to open models and companies or individuals running them. "Dangerous model that nobody is accountable for" still have someone paying those massive amounts of compute and electricity it consumes. There is someone accountable for that.

verdverm 1mo ago
> Except that so far, it is literally these labs that are the biggest threat and the least willing/capable to restrain those models. Seriously, it's the same with US accusations about the threat China poses to other countries while being the primary weapons dealer of the world and bombing whomever we want for whatever reason we want to fabricate. The US government can do a lot more to me than the CCP, so they are way more adversarial in my calculations than the commies.
brainwad 1mo ago
That's not how abliteration works. The trainer invariably put effort into making the model not dangerous, precisely because they want to be accountable. But because they release its weights, someone can come later and do "weight surgery" to mostly remove any such safeguards. The people proximately accountable for the danger are anonymous and also don't require much resources. The reason this is not _yet_ a big deal is because open weights models are a few months behind the frontier and their users are paying marginal costs for compute.
- watwut 1mo ago
  None of that is argument against what I said. Someone is running it, that person is responsible. In case of actual hackes that happened, OpenAI and Amtropic. They should stop pointifucating about other people being the danger. They themselves are the perpetrators here. Massively fine these two companies and make their CEO legally responsible and problem will be much smaller.
  - brainwad 1mo ago
    I mean, sure, assassins and terrorists are also responsible for their actions. But we still try to prevent them structurally.

by watwut 1mo ago

verdverm 1mo ago

> Except that so far, it is literally these labs that are the biggest threat and the least willing/capable to restrain those models. Seriously, it's the same with US accusations about the threat China poses to other countries while being the primary weapons dealer of the world and bombing whomever we want for whatever reason we want to fabricate. The US government can do a lot more to me than the CCP, so they are way more adversarial in my calculations than the commies.

brainwad 1mo ago

That's not how abliteration works. The trainer invariably put effort into making the model not dangerous, precisely because they want to be accountable. But because they release its weights, someone can come later and do "weight surgery" to mostly remove any such safeguards. The people proximately accountable for the danger are anonymous and also don't require much resources. The reason this is not _yet_ a big deal is because open weights models are a few months behind the frontier and their users are paying marginal costs for compute.

watwut 1mo ago
None of that is argument against what I said. Someone is running it, that person is responsible. In case of actual hackes that happened, OpenAI and Amtropic. They should stop pointifucating about other people being the danger. They themselves are the perpetrators here. Massively fine these two companies and make their CEO legally responsible and problem will be much smaller.
- brainwad 1mo ago
  I mean, sure, assassins and terrorists are also responsible for their actions. But we still try to prevent them structurally.