• 0 Posts
  • 9 Comments
Joined 2 天前
cake
Cake day: 2026年11月1日

help-circle



  • Your examples of prohibition and mine are not the same. Mine were purposefully chosen because they are or were contentious, just like AI is now.

    Your examples, on the other hand, outline situations where we were using something harmful that we did not realize at the time was harmful. Once that realization came to light, everyone agreed to stop. If you want to say this is the current situation with AI, then that’s coherent. This is my olive branch to you.

    As for local models if you want to maintain that DSv4.1, GLM-5.3-f, M-3.1, or ther ilk are not near frontier-level. Then, I guess you are allowed to be wrong.



  • Legislate AI away

    Yes, because that has worked so well in the past for alcohol, cannabis, homosexuality, or nuclear proliferation.

    existing open models that run on consumer-grade GPUs and are therefore orders of magnitude weaker and can’t be used to break down any systems.

    This class of models is already perfectly capable of finding and exploiting vulnerabilities in software, and is within spitting distance of the frontier.

    Or penalize heavily any company developing a model that is subsequently used to invade a system.

    Yeah, that case will be on the docket right behind U.S.A. vs Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, and Raytheon surely.

    Do you seriously believe any of these are within the realm of possibility, or even believability?