| Tom doesn't take up the single argument that is of primary concern to me, which is that capable models running in environments where they can be and regularly are abliterated, and as a society and civilization, we have no good answer to what to do about the destabilizing threats this poses. I don't have an answer. And I'm not arguing in favor of some cynical solution which distills down to the state defending oligopolies. But the threats are real and we have to reason about them soberly, widely, loudly, and quickly. Most readers here know that defense is always at a disadvantage when it comes to security. That is true to an extent hard to fathom given the innumerable dimensions along which an antisocial actor can apply the force-multiplication of capable models to ill ends. It doesn't have to be FUD-adjacent concerns such as biological terrorism and cybersecurity, though these are real; the opportunities for mischief and misadventure are endless and the opportunities for poisoning the body politic or bringing down basic infrastructure many. What then is to be done...? I don't know; but I do know that the argument that almost all use of open models poses no threat is insufficient. We have not reckoned as a culture with force-multiplication such as this technology brings. We need to get ahead of the curve, and that will require making novel hard and unwelcome decisions in the short term. The IMO inevitable outcome otherwise is to rue in leisure, after some global shock, assuming we have opportunity to. |