logoalt Hacker News

0xDEAFBEADyesterday at 9:29 PM1 replyview on HN

With closed-weight, we can get the models out to defenders before they're in the hands of attackers.

There are also other categories of risk such as biorisk. Open-weight means no guardrails.

Don't get me wrong, I like your idea of deflating the AI bubble, I'm just skeptical that this is a great way to do it.

The PauseAI people have some ideas: https://pauseai.info/proposal

* International body which must approve new training runs

* Ban training on copyrighted material

* Hold AI model creators liable

The essential benefit of your idea is making new training runs unprofitable. But I imagine there are other ways to accomplish that, e.g. by taxing AI companies to the point where they are just barely squeaking by financially.


Replies

bigyabaitoday at 2:00 AM

> Open-weight means no guardrails.

We're going to live in that world forever now, capable adversarial models have already been trained and will be used in a large conflict.

The pragmatic issue is hacking, and current open-weight LLMs are already capable of it. Bioweapons and RSI are pie-in-the-sky theories that distract from the real-world situation that each government wants to exploit.

show 1 reply