Models like this are in effect dual use - just like computers and computer programmes in general. Ethercap is a very useful debugging tool - and can also be used for exploits.
We don't ban Ethercap, we police the use - just like with all dual use stuff.
If OpenAI is directing the software ( how ever badly ) that's hacking - OpenAI is responsible, it's not the fault of the software.
Note if somebody else is using OpenAI models to generate code to hack - that's not OpenAI's responsibility it's the person using and running the generated code.
> Note if somebody else is using OpenAI models to generate code to hack - that's not OpenAI's responsibility it's the person using and running the generated code.
No, I don't think a company can get away from releasing a powerful tool that can cause disruption if used poorly. This is just not how society works.
The reality is that labs will get blamed for things people do using it. And they have - look at any news about US Army using Claude etc
Things can be regulated in sensible countries where the things are pretty much single use - like guns.
However, nobody bans cars because somebody has driven one into a crowd, or hammers because of a particularly grusome murder.
These models, just like computers, are universal tools by their nature - they don't fall into the gun category - they fall into the hammer and car category.
> Things can be regulated in sensible countries where the things are pretty much single use - like guns.
Sure and there are regulations on who can own guns and licenses. And that's literally how Mythos is handed out today - to trusted partners. What is your opinion about that?
Also, companies are not allowed to release stuff like Nuclear technology, chemical weapons etc. These literally can't be regulated and a single adversary can use it destructively.
"but but they are just tools ok" doesn't work when the capability is big enough.
Look, it might be easy sitting behind a computer asking OpenAI to release whatever new model because you personally don't think you will be affected. But the society needs to be careful on what it hands potential adversaries.
There is plenty of commercial hacking tools. And those seem to survive just fine.
Issue really isn't that these models can be used for something.
Issue is that they have been used for something with such disregard of any even slightly reasonable oversight that everyone in executive team, board and every shareholder should be in jail just now...
We don't ban Ethercap, we police the use - just like with all dual use stuff.
If OpenAI is directing the software ( how ever badly ) that's hacking - OpenAI is responsible, it's not the fault of the software.
Note if somebody else is using OpenAI models to generate code to hack - that's not OpenAI's responsibility it's the person using and running the generated code.