1/2 Thanks Gavin for an especially thoughtful exchange. I don't usually spend much time on social media but I wanted to engage here because it really brings out the heart of an important conversation.
First, on regulation, I think that “either concentrate it in the hands of a chosen few companies and politicians via regulation or distribute it widely” is a false choice. I know that there’s a sort of Silicon Valley shorthand where regulation = regulatory capture = concentration of power, but I’ve always found this to be an overly simplified picture of the world. Many people outside this bubble think of regulation as something that constrains corporate power and benefits ordinary people. I don’t necessarily agree with that perspective either, rather I think it’s complicated and really depends on what the “regulation” consists of. But in particular I think that those in the “regulation = regulatory capture = concentration of power” frame often underrate the decentralizing power of objective and fair institutional processes. A crude analogy is that the formal court system can sometimes feel stuffy and elitist, but it does a much better job of defending the rights of vulnerable individuals than the alternative, mob justice. At their best, institutions can vest power in ideas rather than people, and thereby decentralize that power.
This is why Anthropic has always made its policy proposals very carefully. We try very hard to make proposals that disadvantage (slow down) frontier AI companies while *advantaging* smaller competitors. California’s SB53 (which we supported), and even the much-maligned SB 1047 (which we were ambivalent on), completely exempt any company below a certain amount of revenue or model training costs from being covered at all (it was $500M for SB 53, lower for 1047 but we objected to that). More recently the testing process we’ve advocated for at CAISI and the White House involves more rigorous tests for frontier models than off-frontier models — something that differentially advantages challengers. Similarly, the “Pacing the Frontier” letter envisions (or at least Anthropic’s preferred implementation of it envisions) modulating the pace of the very best models while not constraining those who are catching up. This hurts the business interests of the frontier labs and helps challengers, including open-weights!
Overall my view is that AI is *structurally* a technology that tends to concentrate power, for reasons that have nothing to do with regulation (more to do with the extreme implications of the scaling laws). Open-weights do help some with this but are nowhere near a sufficient solution because they simply shift the concentration somewhat to those with the most compute and chips (which are roughly the frontier labs plus maybe hardware providers). By contrast I think the right “rules of the road” can simultaneously (a) address AI’s cyber/bio/alignment risks, (b) institutionally constrain the power of the frontier AI companies, and (c) leave room for open-weights models while also addressing the specific risks that they bring.
BTW I do not think that the events of the last few months have “failed to result in [my] preferred regulatory path”. The approach that the Trump administration is reported to be taking — pre-deployment testing for frontier models, and also testing of open-weights models when they get closer to the frontier — is one that I am very supportive of, though of course I have to see the details to be sure. I am also supportive of Demis Hassabis’ ideas around a FINRA-like entity. This contrasts with six months ago when most of the industry was still pushing for preemption of all state regulation and no apparent federal approach either.
Tech giant Apple sued ChatGPT-maker OpenAI, alleging the artificial intelligence company stole its trade secrets as part of efforts to build out a competing hardware business. https://t.co/wW5caeDWK6
Egypt🇪🇬 has significantly boosted oil production in its Western Desert, increasing output by almost 12,000 barrels per day recently.
Partnerships with companies like Apache Corporation and Agiba Petroleum have increased daily outputs, with Khalda Petroleum raising production by over 10,000 barrels per day.
The use of advanced technologies, such as AI and aerial surveys, has contributed to improved efficiency and resource mapping.
Egypt🇪🇬 plans to drill 100 new exploratory wells by 2026, aiming to further increase reserves, bolster long-term energy security, and maintain its role as a leading regional producer.
JUST IN: Andrej Karpathy, a top AI scientist at Anthropic, is reportedly barred from accessing the company’s most advanced AI model because he is not a U.S. citizen.
We’re launching Claude Corps, a national fellowship program matching people early in their careers with US nonprofits.
We'll teach 1,000 people to use Claude, and pay them to use AI to advance their hosts’ missions.
https://t.co/QI6JmlAdSr
"I am worried for my kids if we as a society don't have a serious conversation about what the implications of AI's continued advances mean."
Anthropic co-founder Jack Clark calls for a "brake pedal" to keep human control over AI, which could soon develop itself.
#Newsnight
トランプ政権が海洋観測システムを解体へ。太平洋と大西洋の深海観測機器900台以上が回収される予定。長期的な海洋観測データが失われることに。AMOCの観測データも欠けます。☞ Trump Administration to Dismantle Ocean Monitoring System https://t.co/X2dGB0Nbxa
Canada is set to announce a deal to supply Germany with liquefied natural gas from a planned export facility on the coast of British Columbia https://t.co/4gs6barVVJ
Celebrating 50 years with the BBC, Talking Movies presenter @TomBrook looks back at his career reporting on culture and cinema across the globe, interviewing some of the biggest names in the film industry