I'm frustrated by articles like this that categorically dismiss the risks of AI in security. If you don't trust OpenAI's and Anthropic's motives, that's fine, you probably shouldn't. But don't tell me that there's nothing to be worried about; we need an alternative proposal.
So let's stop talking past each other and engage with the arguments on both "sides." For example, let's discuss how to ensure competition and availability of open-source models in the long-run while giving the world time to prepare for the immediate security risks of agent swarms.
> immediate security risks of agent swarms.
Immediate since 2024
in 2024 they could not break into unsecured all-my-passwords-and-acces-keys.txt on my Desktop
Do you accept that the story / justification from the labs in the popular media and political discussion is simply nonsense? Do you believe that any real security was autonomously bypassed without direction by these models during internal evaluation?
> Do you accept that the story / justification from the labs in the popular media and political discussion is simply nonsense?
No, and I don't see anyone who's actually demonstrated understanding of what happened in the Hugging Face incident (e.g. reading the reports in their entirety) making this claim.
> Do you believe that any real security was autonomously bypassed without direction by these models during internal evaluation?
Yes. Again, this is hard to deny if you've actually read the reports.
If you were building a sandbox for untrusted code, would you give it access to an artifactory instance outside the sandbox?