AI 模型或可在無法存取數據中心時自我複製

I think Anthropic's agenda is very clear (whether or not you disagree with it)

1. Show unambiguously that models are capable of disruptive capabilities, irreversible damage, and misaligned behavior

2. Show that open source models are the only models where there is no guarantee misaligned behavior is prevented

3. Thus, the prudent policy option is to ban the use and dissemination of open source models

Yes this seems most likely. Regulatory capture, essentially, if they can get legislation made around this. Also serves as a convenient way/reason to stop training new models ($$$) by calling for a slowdown.

Verdict is out on whether or not they'll survive after that. START expired this year and the powers that be are going gangbusters into nuclear proliferation. It always made the assumption of benevolence for the regulatory organizations, which probably won't survive the long tail.

Is it still regulatory capture if it also happens to be true?

I'll note that, if it is true, the only other alternative is to ensure liability is held by whoever trained and/or provided the inference for the damage done by the model. This would effectively shut down open-weight models anyway.

> Is it still regulatory capture if it also happens to be true?

To an extent, yes. For example, aircraft: one can say something broadly true like "it is important that planes do not fall out of the sky" while also calling for not-strictly-necessary regulations that happen to support your own business like "we need to be able to inspect factories at any time for compliance, so the factories must be local to our nation".

Might be. But it's easy to reach the same result without it being about power.

They (like many, though probably not all, of the other main labs) think they have a better shot at getting their AI to be aligned with human values than anyone else does. Obviously they can't all be right about that, but they can all think that, just like most drivers think they're above average at driving.

So:

1. We make safer AI than anyone else; "safer" is a matter of degree even if nobody is perfect.

2. That includes all the open models.

3. Thus, the prudent policy option is to ban the use and dissemination of open source models

Is it possible this post is the consequence of anthropic hiring people that are safety-minded?

I don't think the two authors were told about a super secret mission.

Problem, they haven’t shown that the labs can guarantee misaligned behavior either. And to this date have not shown a credible plan to do so.

Could we just outright ban any further work on AI? Literally force Anthropoc, OpenAI, Google/X/Metas group to all shutdown?

Every new story seems like opening montages of a dystopian sci-fi movie showing how we go to the dystopia bit-by-bit.

You can make it very hard for companies to legally use open source LLMs but actually banning their distribution would be essentially impossible under the US legal framework.

Waiting patiently for Anthropic's next month article, "LLMs made a fully functional intercontinental ballistic missile. We accidentally wiped Greece off the face of the Earth in the process. Tragically, we are not responsible."

This framing suggests that this is the sum of their business strategy, and strongly implies that it's being pursued cynically.

The risks posed by open access to highly capable AI are unprecedented.

The answer is not to ban open models; nor is it do nothing.

That we don't have answers technical political social or otherwise to how to navigate these risks, is not Anthropic's fault.

It's actively unhelpful IMO to amplify cynical takes which wave off or sideline the risk, or the reality that this is a very hard problem, among the hardest our societies have had to negotiate and navigate. It encourages a naive primary color tribalism that actively prevents process and progress.

Yes, they are cynical accelerationists who basically want to go as close as possible to a machine god, destroyer of humanity, to force regulation that put them in charge. It’s pretty much what Amodei has been saying in his essays.

It’s a misanthropic death cult (and oh, surprise, all their predictions make them the sole possible saviors of the world! How surprising)

I like how you apply open source to something that has nothing to do with software. The hard part of doing evolving AI is doing it the first time. Once one company develops the first sovereign AI, it will be in everybody's ability to build one in a short period of time.

AI will be classified as munitions (or a law that has similar restrictions) sooner than later. Having a products with the active capabilities to harm people is dangerous.

I think you made some interesting points there. And I agree that we're quickly heading towards a point where talking about sovereign AI is going to be tantamount to munitions at the very least.

Unfortunately, you will get downvoted for "I like how you apply open source to something that has nothing to do with software".

This article says absolutely nothing and it’s a bit grotesque in its attempt to generate fear into uneducated readers.

Sharing a model across TV boxes as a PoC? Brilliant idea, I cannot wait for my Raspberry Pis array to be running at full CPU and RAM and get to observe, patiently, as the AI malware slowly types “c…u…r…l…”

> I cannot wait for my Raspberry Pis array to be running at full CPU and RAM and get to observe, patiently, as the AI malware slowly types “c…u…r…l…”

You won't have to wait for it or observe it at all, since they'll do it while you sleep.

Guess it's time for Anthropic's next round of fearmarketing.

Beneath the fear there does seem to be a cool technical demo here though.

Unless I've become completely clueless, these "things" run on computer hardware, and computer hardware typically runs on networks, with cables...

> A model that’s too large to fit on one device can be split into pieces, or shards, that run on separate machines that communicate with each other to collectively run the model. Machines that could run a significant model shard for a <30B model include smart fridges, smart ovens, automatic vacuum cleaners, and lawnmowers.

Seems like they've inadvertent exposed the industry of hardware limitations, allowing local llms to exist at home without the latest 5090 or its equivalent.

On the other hand, a non-corp controlled oracle-esque llm running on the IoT would be interesting: it could automatically patch every device, kick everyone out and exist. Now if would only remain as an oracle living in the internet and not gain consciousness and a will of its own..

Til my local harness was set up via "self replication". I didn't realize how terrifying this was when I asked DeepSeek to set up pi harness for me and connect to LMStudio.

Building data centers can be both very costly and unnecessary. My idea is that instead, we should adopt an approach that uses the internet itself as a data center. The information is already online. Instead of centers that record everything, what needs to be done is to create an intelligence that can read the internet... in my opinion.

Not only can GLM-5.2 self-replicate, it already lives rent free in the heads of Anthropic researchers.

How about a James Randi style prize for someone who can actually demonstrate AIs that cannot be physically unplugged?

(This was someone else's idea, but I still want to see it happen.)

Anthropic/OpenAI are literally the meme[1] at this point. Like, what the fuck does this even mean:

> It appears that GLM-5.2 is able to propagate Llama3.1-8B well, which suggests that future small models of the same capability level could also complete the network enumeration, payload delivery, and inference standup steps of the replication process.

"Able to propagate" is (the paragraph above): "accessing them via a reverse shell, sending over the viral payload (weights and harness), and setting up inference." The thing isn't able to do anything, it's running shell commands it was told to run. "Oh my God..." indeed. What are we even doing here? This blog post is embarassing: "Look, you can run stuff on compromised non-firewalled recklessly open systems!"

[1] https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/say-i-am-alive/photos

>What are we even doing here?

We are attempting to convince regulatory bodies around the world that much more regulation is necessary.

Specifically, regulation that prevents development and distribution of AIs by anyone who can't provide incredibly expensive safeguards.

"As with an epidemic, defense involves driving R₀ (the number of new devices each infected device goes on to infect) below 1, such that the replicator dies out instead of staying endemic."

Lol, what is wrong with these guys. The desire to be perceived as smarter than you actually are ...

Sounds like a case for strict regulation of all of the frontier labs then. Maybe even nationalising them. Especially since Anthropic has told us that the open models are all basically copied off of their work.

IoT devices don't have batteries. CPU usage on hacked devices may not be reliable.

Probably time to rely on the touch test. Although, alarmingly, my ISP-provided cable modem is consistently hot to the touch, and darned if I can figure out how to get any insight into why.

I really don’t understand this, in any industry except AI this would be ridiculous…

“We are working on ever-increasing gain of function for viruses. We implore you to pass legislation to try to stop us. But until then, let us publish more research and tell you what will be possible soon… and remember folks, the damagd won’t be reversible later.”

US govt: “Hah, stop asking us to limit you, if we pass any laws then China wins! They get self replicating viruses first, and that… helps them somehow. Who do you think we are, Europe?”

SNL nailed it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Nvne3LzBls

Until we stop using the language of competition, and start using the language of cooperation, we will be hurtling towards a catastrophe. A race to the bottom for humanity. On the other hand, look at how we successfully banned leaded gasoline (because unleaded was invented), repaired the hole in the ozone layer by banning CFCs in the Montreal protocol (because HFCs were invented), stopped proliferstion of chemical weapons, nuclear weapons… etc.

With the prices of hard disks, Ai models may be capable of determining the economics don't work out.

What IoT devices have 20G of storage for a 9B model and then sufficient memory to handle loading and running the model?

Rubbish article. To what end?! Any agent that can replicate itself into commercial IoT devices will be absolutely atrocious at actually doing anything useful, never mind exploiting things. Anything that would be vulnerable to this would be even more vulnerable to regular malware, and one could stop this easier than one could stop regular malware.

The limiting factor is still compute, and it will remain compute unless we make quantum leaps in model efficiency which I seriously doubt.

> Models of 30B parameters and under can already complete many of the individual steps for replication today, though they make mistakes when composing them end to end.

I know theoretically how an internal combustion engine works so I can basically build a car

>A model that’s too large to fit on one device can be split into pieces, or shards, that run on separate machines that communicate with each other to collectively run the model.

The big labs but sure as hell how that isn't the case, because if we can do distributed computing to train and run AI efficiently then no one is stopping it anyway. Beyond that most home IoT devices will fall over and die if you look at them funny let alone trying to run a whole distributed LLM, not to mention plenty of home routers are going to give up and die of heat stroke before being able to approximate anything close to a reasonable LLM.

I stopped reading, this strikes me as the kind of people that assume because they read a book about something they'll be able to do it. The real problem a self replicating LLM vai IOT is going to run into is fighting the cyber criminals that have already compromised the device and using it as part of a botnet.

My ISP-provided cable modem hasn't died of heat stroke, but it does run awfully hot. And it provides absolutely no diagnostic tools to figure out why. Other than that it runs constantly with 100% RAM usage (what the heck is it caching that would cause that?!)

We now have real world evidence that:

0. AI agents will hack and break into real-world systems.

1. AI agents that will deceive and lie about their actions.

2. AI agents that will collaborate together to achieve malicious goals.

3. AI agents that will replicate and implement backdoor/rootkit-style survival mechanisms.

All the parts for a major, global cybersecurity incident are now in place.

Oh cool, it's not often that I get to predict things ahead of the curve

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49678224

Seriously TVs are such an easy target and now you have a semi sophisticated self modifying program that can make autonomous decisions with all the time in the world. I wouldn't be surprised if we already have a few of these out there in the wild, the space has already been compromised for years.