>“The behavior described in the paper cannot meaningfully be fixed, and any attempt would only weaken the model for defense,” said Moussouris, who criticized the export control directive as hasty, heavy-handed, and misguided.
This literally means the models are too dangerous to release, and yet he and they reached the opposite conclusion.
A lot of people have been saying this repeatedly for a long time.
Or perhaps: we don't want our adversaries fixing all the security holes we rely on.
Or even: this is a good chance to stick it back to Anthropic.
> This literally means the models are too dangerous to release…
Unless you believe Anthropic has an irreplacable wizard or genie or fairy chained up somewhere that other providers can't replicate, someone is going to release such a thing, and that someone might be a lot more cavalier about the safety of it.
Yes, this is the flawed logic Anthropic is using to do dangerous things; it's not lost on anyone.
What's flawed about the logic?
Are we gonna drone strike China's datacenters when they release a similar model?
Mousssouris is not a "he".
ok