| > ...I see how no-guardrails LLMs could be truly disastrous... by all accounts this is what's what because of how... > You can do CRISPR in your kitchen. .. and because of the same dynamic we see occurring in cybersec. If you're good enough at cybersec, but not good-good at specific skillsets like offensive, then LLMs and a comp sci degree makes you quite capable in the ways that count. This is a fact, full stop. If you're good enough at biology and have certain ideologies, but not good-good at specific skillsets like genetic engineering in your kitchen, do LLMs get you good enough? Does the impact on cybersec transfer over to this domain? H Hard to say, but it has enough risk indicators for me to think the pushback against these possibilities is the height of otherwise talented engineers being myopic. If good enough at biology can include all the PhD programs across all the world, and you pair other known events like cartels and terrorism groups hiring chemistry PhDs from University of Unemployed Chemistry PhDs, then the next logical extension of that theme with this tech is intense. |
You and others are making a claim about LLMs enabling biological dangers. Some people disagree with you, pointing out that the incremental knowledge an LLM provides over say google or a library card may not be that much.
What seems myopic to me is un-skeptically accepting "AI dangerous, must regulate" messaging from frontier labs that have trillions of dollars of vested interests in this message.