“We’re not going to shoot ourselves in the foot” over hack fallout, says OpenAI’s chief research officer


An OpenAI spokesperson says: “As frontier models have become more capable, we continue to evolve our security practices, but recognize a need to move faster. We know we have more work to do, and we’ve recently slowed development and held back models that don’t meet our safety bar. We continue to make significant changes to strengthen security in our research and testing environments, train models to not just complete tasks but do so responsibly, and use real-time monitoring to respond faster to misaligned behavior.” 

Race vs. pace

OpenAI’s rivals have taken note. Spurred by the fallout from the incident, the major AI labs—including Anthropic, Google DeepMind, and SpaceXAI—have all called for the pace of development to slow down. But how does that square with fierce international competition and trillion-dollar IPOs?

“We’re not going to shoot ourselves in the foot and take ourselves far off the frontier—that’s just a horrible strategy,” he says. “I think it’s really about setting a norm. The more that we can set that norm, it’ll be safer for the industry as a whole.”

Coordination across US companies will be hard enough. Establishing global norms is harder still, especially given concerns around AI’s impact on national security. If a global race continues, what then? And what about open-source models from outfits beyond the reach of US regulations?

Chen dropped his upbeat manner for the first time in our conversation: “I do think we have to prepare for a world where, say, six months to a year out, we have open-source models with the capability of the agents behind the Hugging Face incident, but which are deliberately misaligned to go attack infrastructure or create harm in the world.” 

What that world needs most, says Chen, is OpenAI. “If you entertain for a moment that OpenAI is one of the companies that cares most about alignment—and I believe this to be true; it can be debated, but I really do think it’s true—then if you disappear OpenAI, that would be bad for the world.”

Existential risks

What about the more extreme claims made by some of his Silicon Valley peers that AI could kill us all—and that companies like OpenAI and Anthropic are not doing enough to stop it?    

“Researchers are a heterogeneous group of people, you know, with beliefs across the spectrum,” he says.



Source link

  • Related Posts

    A Biotech Founder Makes the Moral Case for Gene-Editing Human Embryos

    When the Chinese scientist He Jiankui announced in 2018 that he had created the first gene-edited babies, the experiment was widely condemned as reckless and premature. It ended with He…

    Continue reading
    Google launches Fitbit Air in India, though its high price might deter the masses

    Google on Wednesday launched the screen-less Fitbit Air fitness tracker in India, but is pricing at ₹13,999 (roughly $146), ostensibly positioning it as a premium device. Comparatively, the device costs…

    Continue reading

    Leave a Reply

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

    You Missed

    Canada announces support for vaccine manufacturing in Africa

    TD to buy back $10-billion worth of shares after banking watchdog eased buffers

    Uncapped Biswas, Habiba in Nigar Sultana-led Bangladesh squad for Australia ODIs

    Uncapped Biswas, Habiba in Nigar Sultana-led Bangladesh squad for Australia ODIs

    How to choose a credit card for airport lounge access

    How to choose a credit card for airport lounge access

    Van Gogh, Cézanne paintings not seen in decades could fetch $300 million total at auction

    Van Gogh, Cézanne paintings not seen in decades could fetch $300 million total at auction

    A Biotech Founder Makes the Moral Case for Gene-Editing Human Embryos

    A Biotech Founder Makes the Moral Case for Gene-Editing Human Embryos