alt Hacker NewsI think the policy universally makes sense, who would want to give a tool like this to bad actors? But it does leave a big section of the market underserved. Particularly when Mythos was made accessible to very large orgs and then Fable was pulled on export grounds.
Replies
A lot of bad actors are both technically sophisticated and have more than enough resources to post train their model. Morally I think it's still the right choice, but consequence wise I doubt it's going to make a big difference.
The policy is repugnant. Whoever delivers the first frontier model as open weights to the world which lacks these moral guardrails will win.
Stop thinking you know morals better than your users, or get out of the way so a competitor who respects your users more can serve them!
It's really absurd to think any of these models can be protected _by commercial interests_. They couldn't keep from hiring north koreans anymore than they'll stop bad actors from operationalizing these models.
Do you think bad actors can't make something like this? What are you even talking about?
The problem is that it is a fool's errand to try to keep software tools from 'bad actors'. It is as pointless now as it was during the Crypto Wars. Information is simply too easy to move.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crypto_Wars