Comment by sfink

Ok, fair. I know that was also in the article, but your comment made me reread it, and I think you're right about the focus. I over-fixated on the headline. On second read, it's more like a lazy way to justify a preconceived idea that all models should be available and unconstrained to everyone (or everyone who might get attacked, at least, but that's approximately everyone.)

Updated tl;dr: "There are incentives for OpenAI to say that AI is powerful and dangerous, therefore fully unconstrained AIs should be available to everyone."

It's still more of a statement of belief than a logical argument.