← Back to context

Comment by 0xbadcafebee

5 hours ago

Dario has not (and will not) say he wants to ban Chinese models outright. But:

1. He's made many posts about how he thinks "dangerous" models are bad (https://www.anthropic.com/news/position-open-weights-models)

2. He writes posts proving Chinese open weight models are "dangerous" (https://insightsintegration.com/anthropic-warns-of-advanced-...)

3. He talks about about how he wants stronger govt regulation of AI (https://www-cdn.abcnews.com/Business/exclusive-anthropic-ceo...), and explicitly mentions he does not trust China at all and doesn't want them to have Mythos.

Do the math: 1 + 2 + 3 = he wants to regulate/ban the Chinese open weights.

Of course, Anthropic and OpenAI will then write posts about how their own models are dangerous - but that's okay, they're the good guys.

Honestly, open weight models are dangerous, and I haven't seen a single convincing argument against that.

  • Not being able to audit my own software and configurations for vulnerabilities is dangerous. Consolidating power over the majority of Americans' jobs is insanely dangerous. Need I continue?

    There are no choices here which do not carry risk. I haven't seen a single convincing argument against these points.

  • I'd argue that OpenAI and Anthropic are far more dangerous and I also haven't seen a single convincing argument against that.

  • Other things that are dangerous: kitchen knives, cars, household chemicals, not tying your shoelaces, political parties, water. Danger is a normal part of life. Rather than regulate or ban anything dangerous, what we normally do is assess specific risks, and only put a limited amount of regulation in place where it's absolutely needed to prevent the most harm.

    We also put responsibility on humans to act responsibly. In theory, it's absolutely insane to allow human beings the ability to walk into a street with automobiles, because obviously they will be killed! But we don't ban them from walking there, and we don't ban cars, because it's pretty uncommon for people to walk directly in front of a moving car, despite there being obvious danger.

    Ultimately the biggest risk of AI isn't the AI. It's what human beings do using the AI. Just like with hammers, knives, drills, chemicals, cars... we regulate the human's actions and create laws to direct their use, rather than regulate the items themselves.