alt Hacker News> How this would actually be achieved is unclear though. Dario is at least proposing a solution a solution
How it would be achieved is a pretty important bit! One which Dario is not proposing any concrete solution for other thanks hand waves at some gov safety committee.
Would this restrict downloads of an open model, or publishing?
Say we ban domestic hosting un-approved open models. How does Dario propose to ban downloads from abroad? You can’t tell what an encrypted payload contains, do we need to restrict encryption?
Isn't it up to the open model advocates and publishers to come up with the solutions for making them safe?
Like, there's three plausible arguments about safety of open models:
1. Any concerns are fake news. Open models will always be safe.
2. Safety is irrelevant. Open models should not be regulated even if they're unsafe.
3. Safety is a technical problem with technical solutions. People releasing open models should invent and implement such solutions.
I think option 1 is totally out of touch with reality.
Option 2 is at least self-consistent, it's the argument being made by people who will say that all regulation is always bad. It's also like the worst possible world from an x-risk perspective (but I realize that the average HN poster believes any x-risk concerns are just frontier lab marketing).
Option 3 is playing on hard mode compared to proprietary models, which can both implement additional safeguards out-of-model and prevent modifications of the model. But if the answer to it is "it's too hard, Anthropic needs to come up with the technical solution", then that's not exactly a ringing endorsement for the safety practices of the open model labs, right?