[cortesoft]

> This won't be made available to anyone and everyone, but we do believe that responsible SMEs and midmarket companies also need access to these tools in order to identify key vulnerabilities in their systems; not just enterprises.

So this is the same policy that Anthropic and OpenAI have, it is just based on your criteria rather than theirs.

[ortekk]

Reminds me of a time when Tailscale cofounder went on a rant about how big bad AWS charges too much for bandwidth, and his solution was to send that money to Tailscale instead

[kennyadam]

As soon as I read that I literally scoffed. Doublethink at its finest. Doubleplusungood.

[dk189]

I 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.

[cortesoft]

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

[rustcleaner]

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!

[cyanydeez]

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.

[sudosysgen]

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.

[devin]

Do you think bad actors can't make something like this? What are you even talking about?

[yieldcrv]

I actually wonder how valuable this verbiage is

To me it looks like copycat marketing more than a strongly held stance

Artificial scarcity, membership club criteria to make members feel special

Perhaps there is an organization that awards this “responsibility” behavior, the EU comes to mind but not lucrative enough

As far as engagement farming goes, it got us to engage and boost its reach, for something we might otherwise ignore with more benign language

Once I get the answers I will execute