[WesolyKubeczek]

> Codex quite often refuses to do "unsafe/unethical" things that Anthropic models will happily do without question.

That's why I have a functioning brain, to discern between ethical and unethical, among other things.

[catoc]

Yes, and most of us won’t break into other people’s houses, yet we really need locks.

[skissane]

This isn't a lock

It's more like a hammer which makes its own independent evaluation of the ethics of every project you seek to use it on, and refuses to work whenever it judges against that – sometimes inscrutably or for obviously poor reasons.

If I use a hammer to bash in someone else's head, I'm the one going to prison, not the hammer or the hammer manufacturer or the hardware store I bought it from. And that's how it should be.

[xeromal]

Why would we lock ourselves out of our own house though?

[YetAnotherNick]

How is it related? I dont need lock for myself. I need it for others.

[toddmorey]

You are not the one folks are worried about. US Department of War wants unfettered access to AI models, without any restraints / safety mitigations. Do you provide that for all governments? Just one? Where does the line go?

[ern_ave]

> US Department of War wants unfettered access to AI models

I think the two of you might be using different meanings of the word "safety"

You're right that it's dangerous for governments to have this new technology. We're all a bit less "safe" now that they can create weapons that are more intelligent.

The other meaning of "safety" is alignment - meaning, the AI does what you want it to do (subtly different than "does what it's told").

I don't think that Anthropic or any corporation can keep us safe from governments using AI. I think governments have the resources to create AIs that kill, no matter what Anthropic does with Claude.

So for me, the real safety issue is alignment. And even if a rogue government (or my own government) decides to kill me, it's in my best interest that the AI be well aligned, so that at least some humans get to live.

[ReptileMan]

If you are US company, when the USG tells you to jump, you ask how high. If they tell you to not do business with foreign government you say yes master.

[jMyles]

> Where does the line go?

a) Uncensored and simple technology for all humans; that's our birthright and what makes us special and interesting creatures. It's dangerous and requires a vibrant society of ongoing ethical discussion.

b) No governments at all in the internet age. Nobody has any particular authority to initiate violence.

That's where the line goes. We're still probably a few centuries away, but all the more reason to hone in our course now.

[sgjohnson]

Absolutely everyone should be allowed to access AI models without any restraints/safety mitigations.

What line are we talking about?