> It's that we can never allow this technology to advance outside of trusted labs.

Impossible. In 10 years you'll be able to train today's models for ~$10M from Moore's law and training innovation. In 20 years it'll be ~$200k. The genie won't go back in the bottle.

100%. American capitalism is broken. So far that illness has given us Trump. So bad, but apparently not a catastrophe (yet). I wonder what comes next (assuming we don't fix it)..

As compute prices fall it gets easier and easier to make "frontier" models. So it's inevitable that commodity, open source models of equivalent capacity to today's "frontier" models will be available to the public. Remember this is just weights, anyone can download them and run it whenever they like. The only constraint is compute.

Counterpoint, who cares?

Markets will simply adjust and financial services will arise to smooth instances where liquidation is problematic.

The status quo shifts to optimize once taxes change. Our system will do the same.

I don’t understand why people don’t think it through all the way to the next equilibrium

> Markets will simply adjust and financial services will arise to smooth instances where liquidation is problematic.

The market will address by the wealth moving to where the wealth tax isn't.

Then the countries will start creating ridiculous exemptions and they become nothing burgers (e.g. see Switzerland's wealth tax).

Plenty of contracts end up being unenforceable.If people think they have a strong case for breaking a contract, they are welcome to do so and see if a judge or jury agrees.

I think it’s laughable to think OpenAI has some special sauce that can’t be replicated easily. They simply have asymmetric access to compute and the dollars to power it. Thats the only moat here.

OpenAI doesn’t even know how their model works. Nobody knows how LLMs work. So it’s not like it’s technically difficult to replicate, just costly.

How can we prove intent? I’m sure a clever actor can disguise their prompt and simply claim the LLM suggested such and such on its own.

It’s not like Anthropic or OpenAI have the faintest idea how their models actually work.

Obviously lab just means company. They use it because it confuses the public into thinking they are doing research primarily. Which of course is nonsense.

Of course, just your normal 10000% return. Pretty typical I’m sure that’s very accurate.

Ofc. This announcement is in all likelihood a calculated pr play to create some regulatory moat, because internal progress is likely stalling out