大卫·萨克斯谈 Anthropic 出口管制
David Sacks on Anthropic export control

原始链接: https://twitter.com/DavidSacks/status/2065853007619588171

Anthropic 在发布其“Fable”模型后正面临审查。该模型是其“Mythos”人工智能的一个版本,而 Anthropic 此前曾认定 Mythos 为一种危险的网络武器。尽管 Anthropic 曾倡导对 Mythos 进行严格监管,但一位受信任的合作伙伴近期发现了一个可以绕过 Fable 安全护栏的越狱漏洞。 美国政府要求 Anthropic 要么修复此漏洞,要么将该模型下架。Anthropic 拒绝了这一要求,并公开称该越狱漏洞无关紧要。美国政府认为这是一个重大的安全风险,随即便对该模型实施了出口管制。 这一应对措施与其既定的“人工智能安全”品牌形象形成了鲜明对比。政府官员对该公司拒绝处理其此前承认至关重要的安全漏洞感到不解。政府表示仍重视 Anthropic 的技术能力,并希望问题能尽快解决。在安全隐患消除之前,出口管制将持续有效,这也明确了 Anthropic 必须将安全置于商业部署之上的责任。

这篇 Hacker News 讨论聚焦于 David Sacks 对 Anthropic 处理出口管制及“Mythos”AI 模型方式的批评。Sacks 认为,尽管 Anthropic 公开承诺确保 AI 安全,但为了维护声誉和商业利益,该公司正在淡化其模型被“越狱”的严重性。 评论区的观点存在严重分歧。一些用户认为 Sacks 的批评很有说服力,指出 Anthropic 在处理这些曾被其标榜为“危险”的风险时表现出虚伪。另一些用户则对此持高度怀疑态度,认为 Sacks 是因为其政治立场及过往的“MAGA 谄媚”历史才进行攻击,暗示其动机并非出于真正的安全顾虑,而是受个人或政治议程驱动。 这场辩论触及了更广泛的主题,包括 AI 民主化与政府管控之间的冲突、“AI 安全”是否沦为监管俘获的工具,以及公众对科技领袖和现任政府信任感的普遍缺失。归根结底,该讨论串反映了一种愤世嫉俗的共识:许多用户认为各方——无论是政客还是 AI 企业——都缺乏诚信。因此,一些用户建议忽略这些修辞,仅关注这些技术在现实世界中的实际应用成果。
相关文章

原文

I’ve had a number of conversations with folks inside and outside government about the current situation with Anthropic, and here is what I believe to be true: — As we know, Anthropic publicly released its Mythos class models earlier this week under the commercial name Fable. — Fable is Mythos with guardrails. But if those guardrails fail, then you’ve exposed Mythos and its advanced cyber capabilities to people who shouldn’t have them. (Keep in mind that Anthropic itself widely promoted the idea that Mythos was a cyberweapon and needed to be regulated as such. They asked for government regulation of Mythos and championed the guardrails on Fable. If there is a vulnerability — big or small — it is Anthropic’s responsibility to patch.) — A highly credible trusted partner of both Anthropic and the USG who was testing Fable came forward with a jailbreak of those guardrails. The Admin asked Dario to fix the jailbreak or de-deploy the model. Dario refused. — In their blog post, Anthropic defended its decision by saying the jailbreak isn’t serious. That is not what the trusted partner and the USG believe; nor is that kind of minimizing language consistent with Anthropic’s brand as the AI safety company. It’s difficult to fathom how they could claim a jailbreak allowing operability of a cyber weapon could be defined as not “serious.” — In the past, Anthropic has always said that safety must be top priority and taken super seriously. In this case, Anthropic prioritized the continued offering of the consumer model over safety. — In reaction, the Admin issued the export control. The Admin did this reluctantly. It’s been very surprised that Anthropic hasn’t wanted to cooperate with a reasonable safety request (ie fixing the jailbreak issue). Anthropic’s reaction is very much at odds with their branding and ethos as a safe AI research community. — The Admin’s hope now is that Anthropic remediates the safety issue, the export control is lifted, and Fable goes back into general release. The Admin wants all of this to happen as soon as possible. It is frankly bewildered that Anthropic hasn’t wanted to comply with safety requests that it previously said were its highest priority. — Those trying to misdirect and tie this action to the prior DoW/Anthropic issues are wrong. The Admin values Anthropic’s technical capabilities and feels that this issue, while serious, should be easily resolved. The ball is in Anthropic’s court.

联系我们 contact @ memedata.com