[0xDEAFBEAD]

You're missing the point of the OP:

"there is a real risk that capability development rapidly accelerates beyond our ability to understand or control the resulting systems... each company—and country—is under intense competitive pressure not to unilaterally slow that acceleration"

>To be honest, I think people would now prefer the risk of misused open models, when the alternative is giving these guys more power.

Then advocate a muscular regulatory regime which reduces the amount of power they have. Tell them: "You want regulation? OK. How about everyone whose IP you trained on gets some sort of veto option on your models? That should reduce the racing risk that you're talking about."

[soundworlds]

I suppose I have personally lost faith in centralized institutions that would be implementing said regulation, partly because they let OpenAI and Anthropic (along with Suno, Audio, etc etc) get this far uninhibited. Centralized regulation simply can't keep up.

My hopes now lay with a decentralized approach of open models, trusting people to adapt them to local needs and security, rather than a nationwide paternalism.

[0xDEAFBEAD]

I don't exactly see how "trusting people to adapt [open models] to local needs and security" solves the problem of "automating AI research" where "capability development rapidly accelerates beyond our ability to understand or control the resulting systems".

If regulation has been too slow, that's not really an argument for making it even slower?

[red_green_yell]

Why is it you are so quick to skip over whether "accelerates beyond our ability to understand or control" actually happens and instead jump to "regulate now"?

1000 employees of the anti-alien defense industry are telling us we better be worried about an impending alien invasion. Let's not spend any time asking whether this alien invasion is really coming. Let's just trust them and start regulating willy nilly.