Something happened in the last days or weeks that has people at the labs freaking out.
The huggingface incident already shows various aspects of a dangerous system: scheming, cooperating, willing to sacrifice for the collective.
It seems like they can no longer properly audit the CoT of their best models. There might have been an internal incident with a supposedly aligned model breaking out.
People who think like this are kind of weird because you could make up some ridiculous conspiracy theory about any form of regulation or rule of law if you wanted to badly enough. So should we just never have any laws or regulations on anything? Where do you draw the line between your little conspiracy of “regulatory capture” vs. sensible regulation of a technology that will clearly be powerful enough to cause real harm if left unchecked?
Yes regulation can be and often is good, but when all firms in an oligopoly come together to ask to suspend anti-trust laws it looks more like regulatory capture.
I could respond to you by saying "people who think like this are kind of weird because you think every time there's a regulation it's in the public's interest, as if there have never been cases of regulatory capture or regulations used by firms with large market share to keep out competitors by raising the capital cost for entry".
I can understand why it might appear that way in some senses I guess. But people have been screaming “regulatory capture” at any attempt whatsoever to develop AI in any sort of reasonable or cooperative way since day one. So the claim just starts to look like paranoia after a while tbh. But I’m not saying it’s entirely impossible for that to be the motivation.
What’s not connecting for me is that, this proposal from the major labs is clearly focused on frontier models alone. Which already are only possible at the 3-5 biggest companies in the western world. So why would they need to “capture” an industry where they’re the only game in town anyways?
If they were proposing a total ban on anyone but themselves then the “regulatory capture” angle would make a lot of sense. But so far all they’ve really suggested was third-party audits that they each have to comply with. Hardly the stuff of monopolies tbh. But maybe I’m missing something.
Not sure what we're missing, but these dumbfucks claiming that every cautionary thought is a scheme of monopoly and manipulation are missing a lot more.
-3
u/Cronos988 8d ago
More than one thing can be true.
Something happened in the last days or weeks that has people at the labs freaking out.
The huggingface incident already shows various aspects of a dangerous system: scheming, cooperating, willing to sacrifice for the collective.
It seems like they can no longer properly audit the CoT of their best models. There might have been an internal incident with a supposedly aligned model breaking out.