[onesandofgrain]

Pardon me, so they'll hunt down huggingface, ollama and china? I don't quite understand? What about the millenia of companies that provide apis for local llms and private companies that use local llms for privacy reasons? I don't even understand how you'd execute such a ruleset.

[pixl97]

I mean if you go into old AI safety discussion from before LLMs you'll see they don't do that. They go after new hardware. That's way easier than going after software. Hardware doesn't last forever and manufacturers will gladly cripple their cards and license powerful ones to businesses.

[wesleywt]

Dario and friends are fear mongering local models to get them banned.

[no-name-here]

“are”? Source? I've seen an absolute flood of “BREAKING:” claims online recently which are quotes from 3 years ago where all of their context is removed, or that quotes from 3 years ago are “because of GLM 5.2”, etc. https://www.techpolicy.press/transcript-senate-hearing-on-pr...

[rhdunn]

Yes that clip [4] is making the rounds again in light of Mythos, but his stance (and that of others) hasn't changed ([3] is from a new interview).

[1] https://memeburn.com/amodei-says-open-source-ai-is-becoming-... [2 July 2026]

[2] https://fortune.com/2026/07/02/anthropic-fable-and-mythos-ar... [July 2, 2026]

[3] https://www.youtube.com/shorts/S72ZRBSNHZc [2 weeks ago] -- Dario: "Now what I do worry about with some of these laggard models is the risks of them, where we have Mythos-class cyber capabilities, 12 months from now we'll have much better cyber capabilities. But the Mythos-class cyber capabilities may just be available for anyone to download."

[4] https://digg.com/tech/zx1bqifo

[no-name-here]

Thanks for the reply.

[3] - he does express worry over the risks of open models -- much as he has long expressed worry over his own models (and AI safety was the primary reason for Anthropic's founding) -- but he does not even imply that they should be banned, and he even explicitly says there is nothing that can be done to stop open models from being distributed.

For completeness's sake:

[1] The primary linked source seems to also be the 2023 testimony, albeit posted with a timestamp from this week.

[2] Does not seem to quote Dario, nor mention banning - I think you included this as an example of someone else who is explicitly worried about AI risks, including of models that can't be pulled back -- fair enough (although I can't see that they have any association with a frontier lab). If the argument is that many people have concerns about AI risks, including risks specific to open models, and who are not associated with a frontier lab, I agree with you.