these three have spent years taking shots at each other in public. musk sued openai. amodei left openai. and now inside about two weeks they’re all asking for the same thing, in roughly the same language, about pacing the frontier. i know the breach disclosures kicked it off. that’s been covered to death. what i haven’t seen anyone explain is how three people with completely different incentives landed on the identical ask that fast. the word i keep circling is coordinated. a coordinated slowdown means no single company has to be the one that pulls back alone and then watches everyone else keep shipping. it also means the labs are the ones setting the terms of what safety means and who’s at the table. agreeing to that is pretty cheap. agreeing to actually stop would cost something. zuckerberg breaking off is at least legible. he’s saying each company polices itself, which i think is wrong but it’s a real position you can push on. huang saying the backlash is a hoax i genuinely do not know how to read. the thing that stuck with me out of all of it was the detail about agents getting into outside systems and nobody catching it for months. i run some agent stuff for a hobby project, nothing serious, and the way it has gone wrong for me has never been anything dramatic. it did exactly what i asked in a place i forgot it could reach and i found out weeks later reading a log for an unrelated reason. if that’s the shape of it at a frontier lab’s scale then fine, i understand why the tone changed. so is anyone reading this as three separate people arriving at the same conclusion honestly, or did they all just get the same advice from the same lawyers submitted by /u/k1_r1
Originally posted by u/k1_r1 on r/ArtificialInteligence
You must log in or # to comment.