Sure, it's in the name itself (open), but what's the rush then? In AI safety, the time left to solve the problem is a crucial factor. Of course it can be measured in man-years instead of years. Still, what's the big rush, or can we at least see some calculations? Democratization is different/orthogonal to pushing the boundaries of research.
I'm not saying releasing gym and universe was a bad choice. Honestly, I can't say. But can we see a rationale?
One can read this piece and see it as a group of super driven and uber competent people designing a super, faster car, open sourced with a 3D printer for the parts etc, without thinking about the lack of safe roads. It's a jungle out there. And in this case, one wild fast car is enough for a disaster.
Let's not be naive, it will be like virus vs anti-virus. Some bad people will try to make dangerous AI, at some point. The balance will be held by applying AI against AI.
I'm not saying releasing gym and universe was a bad choice. Honestly, I can't say. But can we see a rationale? One can read this piece and see it as a group of super driven and uber competent people designing a super, faster car, open sourced with a 3D printer for the parts etc, without thinking about the lack of safe roads. It's a jungle out there. And in this case, one wild fast car is enough for a disaster.