3 ms·

We should not be creating/running models that would unilaterally choose to hack into Hugging Face. Yes, we should also have excellent sandboxes. But we need de

We should not be creating/running models that would unilaterally choose to hack into Hugging Face. Yes, we should also have excellent sandboxes. But we need defense in depth. So if/when there are flaws in the sandbox, the models don't unilaterally hack into third parties. This is especially important in light of the models of the future being more capable than the models of today. And real world use of these models involves them having access to the internet, libraries, etc. So we can expect their evaluations to continue granting them some amount of internet access. As for your theory about their motives - these companies make money by charging high margins for frontier models. If regulations slow their development such that their cheaper, less capable competitors catch up, I would switch to their competition.

forshaper 12d ago
In what industry do you see regulations slowing down the biggest incumbents while allowing cheaper, smaller, less capable competitors to proceed without that regulation?
- deskglass 12d ago
  The Digital Markets Act applies to the biggest tech companies. Only 7 companies are currently bound by it. The strictest tier of the Digital Services Act is similar. For an example outside tech, see the Durbin Amendment. Slowing down frontier models would impact the biggest incumbents the most as they are the ones making frontier models. Not all regulation is necessarily regulatory capture. The tobacco industry suffered from the USG's crackdown on cigarettes. AI is topical. Voters think about it. And that's only going to become more true over time. It's harder to do regulatory capture when voters are paying attention. It's sometimes unclear to me if people are opposed to all regulations or AI regulations in particular. Often I hear arguments that would also apply to food safety regulations or restaurant inspections. Eg the argument that torts make regulation superfluous.

forshaper 12d ago

In what industry do you see regulations slowing down the biggest incumbents while allowing cheaper, smaller, less capable competitors to proceed without that regulation?

deskglass 12d ago
The Digital Markets Act applies to the biggest tech companies. Only 7 companies are currently bound by it. The strictest tier of the Digital Services Act is similar. For an example outside tech, see the Durbin Amendment. Slowing down frontier models would impact the biggest incumbents the most as they are the ones making frontier models. Not all regulation is necessarily regulatory capture. The tobacco industry suffered from the USG's crackdown on cigarettes. AI is topical. Voters think about it. And that's only going to become more true over time. It's harder to do regulatory capture when voters are paying attention. It's sometimes unclear to me if people are opposed to all regulations or AI regulations in particular. Often I hear arguments that would also apply to food safety regulations or restaurant inspections. Eg the argument that torts make regulation superfluous.