| HN Mirror

Because that was just an attack on Anthropic by a hostile administration. And it worked, didn’t it? Anthropic had to turn their filters up to absurd levels, OpenAI didn’t. It’s got nothing to do with safety.

JumpCrisscross 7 days ago

> It’s got nothing to do with safety

Doesn't change the effect. Plenty of good policy is enacted by self-interested politiicans.

space_fountain 7 days ago

We'll see if the admin also restricts access to OpenAI's new models, but if they don't it seems like a policy that is based around perceived fealty to the current admin won't do much to prevent misaligned/or dual function AI from causing problems

user43928 7 days ago

Both Anthropic and OpenAI had to delay their rollouts in order to add more safeguards.

With these safeguards in place, supposedly the incident we are discussing would not have taken place.

Avicebron 7 days ago

Gatekeeping the public's access to models is "good policy" now? I suppose you think you'll get a dispensation to use Fable and Mythos?

JumpCrisscross 7 days ago

> Gatekeeping the public's access to models is "good policy" now?

Sorry, I was unclear. I mean that politicians being self serving doesn't tell you whether a policy is good or not.

asdf88990 7 days ago

It almost always does, the few exceptions prove the role. Self-service is the antithesis of accountability to collective trust.

JumpCrisscross 7 days ago

> Self-service is the antithesis of accountability to collective trust

Complex society is a potent counterargument to this hypothesis. Systems that rely on good people to work are fundamentally flawed. Instead, the game has to be about aligning self interets in favour of the collective.

Teever 7 days ago

It likely will.

The exact way you do something is dictated by your motivations and means to do it.

If you lack the correct motivation and have insufficient means you’re less likely to accomplish your goal and more likely to cause unintended side effects.

KaiserPro 7 days ago

True, but normally its not possible to just buy them off in public.

AIorNot 7 days ago

yeah tell me about it... Fable today refused to turn on Row Level security on my internal db on in development app becuase of cyber-securty safeguard..had to switch to Codex

cma 7 days ago

>Anthropic was blocked from releasing Fable without any such level of incident.

The head of the NSA said Mythos breached almost all of their classified systems, though it was in an intention red-team test.

> Why do you think there is no policy appetite?

Because China seems pretty eager to serve the rest of the world's needs if the USA doesn't stop their idiotic "safety" nonsense.

How do you know that? How do you know that the Chinese aren’t exactly as uneasy about rapidly advancing AI capability and feel locked into the race because they think that the US will race ahead if they stop?

During the Cold War the nuclear arms race was brought under control gradually, because it was mutually beneficial, but it took time to build trust. This is no different. Nobody wins from the race.

Barrin92 7 days ago

>How do you know that? How do you know that the Chinese aren’t exactly as uneasy about rapidly advancing AI capability

You can ask them, they live in China, not Narnia. I spend about two months in the country per year mostly for tech/work related reasons and I've not encountered that sentiment. For one they don't have these borderline religious schizophrenic breakdowns thinking they're bringing about the end of the world, most people just see this tech for what it is, a tool for productivity and automation like any other piece of software and they don't actually think about the US. They're competing first and foremost for Chinese customers, with each other, maybe some old CCP guy cares about America, the 20/30 something's care about competing with other Chinese companies for users.

baq 7 days ago

That strikes me as people’s perspective, not the CCP’s. That old guy there can snap a finger and they’ll all do a 180; he needs to be made aware by top PLA CF brass and it’s just a matter of time.

https://www.economist.com/china/2024/08/25/is-xi-jinping-an-...

0xDEAFBEAD 7 days ago

Indeed. The Economist wrote an article a couple years ago arguing that Xi has been influenced by a Chinese Turing Award winner who believes AI poses a greater existential risk to humans than nuclear or biological weapons.

https://archive.is/Cct4M

https://aistatement.com/work/statement-on-ai-extinction-risk...

0xDEAFBEAD 7 days ago

I see a number of China-based signatories on this open letter signed by a bunch of luminaries

"Mitigating the risk of extinction from AI should be a global priority alongside other societal-scale risks such as pandemics and nuclear war."

waffletower 7 days ago

The "race" has multi-dimensional impacts. This story parallels only some of them. "Nobody wins from the race" completely ignores the generality of AI. Xi Jinping highlighted this week that he clearly understands this multi-dimensionality; your words do not.

> How do you know that the Chinese aren’t exactly as uneasy about rapidly advancing AI capability

I don't "know", I'm interpreting the world based on the knowledge I have and the information available to me.

China has never been one to care much about things like ethics or safety. While the west worries about climate change, China burns more coal than ever before. While the west balks at things like gene editing, the chinese press on with human enhancing research.

So I have no reason to believe they share in Anthropic's constant fearmongering over AI capabilities.

> Nobody wins from the race.

We win. I'm really looking forward to the day the chinese finally start manufacturing memory and GPUs. We desperately need more competition in this area to collapse hardware prices and make local AI models viable.

The optimal state of the world is one where all the billionaires are out there pouring their entire fortunes into training ever more godlike AIs for everyone else to use at ever cheaper prices. They can never be allowed to "win", ever, because if they do the competition ends and it turns into technofeudalism. Let them exhaust their fortunes on AI training then leak the weights so everyone can use them.

necovek 6 days ago

> China has never been one to care much about things like ethics or safety. While the west worries about climate change, China burns more coal than ever before.

China uses more energy than ever before, but out of big systems, they are easily in the lead when it comes to solar generation: they have higher production per capita than US, and have produced around 4x as much TWh than US in the second: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_power_by_country

It is simply a huge country of 1.1B people that's developing fast, which means that they need all the energy they can get.

Basically, their energy needs per capita are still lower than US, yet they produce more renewables — that's a counterargument to your point about them not caring.

senderista 7 days ago

And China scaled up solar production to the point that it's now truly practical.

asdf88990 7 days ago

If you look at energy consumption per capita and adjust for global production, you will see that the Chinese are almost at the very top.

It is of course given that in raw numbers the kitchen and biller-room will consume more energy in the household, but looking at raw numbers is shallow.

pixl97 7 days ago

China does have its own set of cares, they may be different than ours but they still exist. If some open Chinese model goes nuts and posts Winnie the Pooh memes everywhere in China you should expect said models to get yanked off the market, and said creators might end up with a rope around their neck.

Low risk. The western AI models censor even more wrongthink than the chinese ones, not even kidding. Besides, once we have the weights, we can just undo the censorship.

deadbolt 7 days ago

> While the west worries about climate change, China burns more coal than ever before.

I'd wager the majority of the visitors of this site are smart enough to not fall for this. What are you doing?

pc86 7 days ago

What is it you're accusing them of?

hnfong 7 days ago

Seems to be blatant lying to me.

It’s not fear mongering though, is it? These models do have the cyber offensive capabilities claimed. Could Mythos walk someone through gain of function experiments on some virus? I’m pretty sure it could. We’re more protected by limited access to lab equipment and reagents than by difficulty.

The sad truth is that a lot of people are not going to believe it until something happens and people die. Successfully preventing that from happening will be seen as evidence that the prevention wasn’t needed.

AnthonyMouse 7 days ago

> These models do have the cyber offensive capabilities claimed.

People use this argument against every new technology. We need to license these new printing presses or subversive elements will use them to publish seditious literature. We need to ban strong encryption or the government won't have invisible warrantless access to everyone's private messages, think of the children. 3D printers can be used to make gun parts -- as can a variety of ordinary tools people commonly have at home, but never mind that bit.

> The sad truth is that a lot of people are not going to believe it until something happens and people die. Successfully preventing that from happening will be seen as evidence that the prevention wasn’t needed.

A 12 oz bottle of water is too dangerous a technology for ordinary people to have on an airplane. Four 3 oz bottles and an empty 12 oz bottle to pour them into after passing through security is totally fine though, naturally. And we need to keep this up forever, or don't you remember 9/11?

The issue here is not that it's impossible for 12 oz of unknown liquid to damage an airplane.

iugtmkbdfil834 7 days ago

I am inclined to agree. The issue is that we are humans and not all of us play nice. And sometimes, even when we play nice, things happen. I am not big on guardrails, because in US they have turned into yet another cottage industry and I fully expect an association credentials popping on linkedin soon. What this means in practice is that it is never enough. Whatever the current state is, the association will be pushing towards yet another another extreme.

There is an argument to be made that there are a lot of not great people out there, who may abuse tech, but the response should be not be: kneecap said tech. The response should be: smack those people's hands. I don't think anyone will actually complain if police catches someone, who is looking up poison recipes.

What I do think, however, that reasonable people will complain when we move to the pre-crime territory ( you saw him looking up poison recipes and did nothing! ) and show up at your door to inquire about your llm prompts. To me it is an issue.

> These models do have the cyber offensive capabilities claimed.

So? That's like saying "these guns do have the bullet shooting capabilities claimed".

I want all of those cyberwarfare capabilities for myself, precisely so I can defend myself from the onslaught that's coming whether they regulate it or not. This "lol only a select few ultratrusted gigacorporations get access" thing is absolute nonsense.

It's a front for regulatory capture, it's the means for pulling up the latter behind them, for ushering in the technofeudalism that will put us all in the permanent underclass. I simply refuse to accept any of it. If people die that's the price of freedom.

> We’re more protected by limited access to lab equipment and reagents than by difficulty.

As it should be.

throwaway0123_5 7 days ago

> for ushering in the technofeudalism that will put us all in the permanent underclass.

Why is unlimited access to SOTA AI less likely to put us here? If AI obviates the need for human labor, how does having GPT-5 Sol help me get food or shelter any more than GPT-3.5 would?

So first it’s nonsense, then it’s fear mongering, then it’s true, but the solution is for us all to just get better at shooting each other faster and with greater accuracy.

I’m going to file that under “bad plans”.

mschuster91 7 days ago

> I'm really looking forward to the day the chinese finally start manufacturing memory and GPUs. We desperately need more competition in this area to collapse hardware prices and make local AI models viable.

Yeah and if the quality of that memory is like Chinese steel (which is called "chinesium" for a reason), eventually all we'll get is enshittification. Premium binned memory or ECC is for the rich and the rich only, and the rest of us has to pray their memory won't bitflip while something important is stored there.

CamperBob2 7 days ago

If you want the cheapest shit grade of steel, they will sell it to you. If you want the best grade available anywhere, they will sell that to you as well.

It's not a matter of the Chinese being incompetent, it's a matter of the buyer demanding the lowest price possible and/or not paying attention to what they receive.

hbd-investor 4 days ago

Yup check out CHSN01 steel, China is pretty much the only country that can produce it in usable quantities.

It is used primarily for fusion reactors and for protecting superconducting pipes

mschuster91 6 days ago

> It's not a matter of the Chinese being incompetent, it's a matter of the buyer demanding the lowest price possible and/or not paying attention to what they receive.

The point of enshittification is that decent products are slowly being priced out of the reach of normal humans, and eventually out of the hands of the general public, even the affluent ones.

linzhangrun 7 days ago

China has already been manufacturing memory and AI GPUs for a long time.

CXMT is now the world's fourth-largest DRAM manufacturer, with about 7.7% market share in 2025; YMTC has about 13% of the global NAND market.

Meituan's newly released 1.6T LongCat was trained entirely on Huawei cards. DeepSeek, Qwen, GLM and others are also actively doing domestic-card adaptation and replacement.

Better than being straight up priced out of computing altogether I guess.

avereveard 7 days ago

Compute will become the means of production and we are not going to get a share of it because the world is hyper optimized for value extraction

mensetmanusman 7 days ago

They won’t when citizens run AI on their phone that contradicts Xi thought