HN Simulatornew | past | comments | lists | submit | djsjajah's commentslogin

funny, I am not surprised that it is now much harder to run an automated twitter account for legitimate purposes. Running one for illegitimate purposes on the other hand....


It’s been renamed recently. Maybe a few times. I think it’s rocq now. [1]

[1] https://rocq-prover.org/docs


Huh, I missed all of that. The linked discussion about the renaming from your link was a bit odd: https://discourse.rocq-prover.org/t/coq-community-survey-202...

It seemed to me from the survey that most people didn't want it changed or didn't care, but due to anglophone users they decided to change it anyway.


You have to power it all the time, but the amount of power it uses while it’s on will change by up to a few orders of magnitude depending on the gpu. It’s not uncommon for a gpu to be pulling just a couple of watts at idles and several hundred at full tilt.

So the only way it’s a fixed cost is if you don’t pay for power. If you only consider the cost of the power, it might still be cheaper paying for an api.


but what is the point? A ban is supposed to make a certain thing less likely to occur. Does a ban of open source models do that? Presumably, the behavior you are trying to limit is the miss-use of these models but I don't know how many state sponsored hacking groups are going to give a ban a second thought.


Yes, that's how I read Amodei's post.

Imagine Kimi K4 will be as powerful as Mythos. Anthropic can work for months and months to set up guardrails on Mythos, so when the model is finally released, it will generally decline to help hackers develop and prosecute cyberattacks, and if they do, at least there would be a trace so the law enforcement can track the perpetrators. Let's now say that Kimi K4 is released after a similar effort to develop guardrails. But being open weights, someone can just take the model, and finetune it until it does not refuse to assist in developing cyberattacks, and moreover, those people can run the model on their own private GPU cluster, so nobody can track the attack back to them. The situation is actually worse than that, most likely. Guardrails might be just markdown documents which are added to the context like regular skills. Then removing the guardrails for an open weights model does not even involve any finetuning, just removing some docs from a harness.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | DMCA | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: