If this is really an existential threat, that's better than fifty of them.
Also, AI performance has proven to be a function of power and compute, and right now most of the compute lies between two companies rushing towards RSI not because they are afraid someone is going to do this before but because they are the ones who wants to build it.
I am not sure that it will.
But a balance duopoly tends to be better than a monopoly and if there are multiple poles then so much the better.
I'm past the point where I believe that any of these a-holes is in it 'for the good of humanity', their behavior so far can be extrapolated safely to what they will be like when they are in the control of what effectively would be the largest private arsenal ever created.
For a while I thought the AI doomers were off their meds and too paranoid but I'm coming around to the fact that they may have a point: we are rapidly approaching a point of no return, if we are not already past it and the people in charge are exactly the wrong people to be in charge at such a point in time.
You cannot really hide an AI datacenter consuming GW of power for too long.
We've mostly been blindsided by covert nuclear programmes. As for weapons in space, they don't have any purpose. The moment they make sense we'll see weapons in space.
Between:
"Iron Sky"
"Whoops Apocalypse"
"Wag The Dog"
"Idiocracy"
This does not exist.
So this is basically suggesting that USA and China should work together to ensure that they are the only ones allowed to develop and maintain capable AI. And between the two of them they can carve up and techno-colonize the rest of the world.
Nuclear powers also gave security guarantees that e.g. convinced Ukraine to give up its Soviet stockpile. We're almost certainly entering a new regime of proliferation due to the breakdown of that system.
(From WP)
India
In 1998, India said it would only sign the treaty if the United States presented a schedule for eliminating its nuclear stockpile, a condition the United States rejected.[18]
Israel
In 2016, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said that its ratification was dependent upon "the regional context and the appropriate timing".[19]
United States
The United States has signed the CTBT, but not ratified it; there is ongoing debate whether to ratify the CTBT.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_parties_to_the_Compreh...
They might not be as interested in slowing down if Anthropic currently had a significantly better model than them!
(I've not had Fable do as much work in Blender as Astra yet though, and it's quite possible that Astra has Fable beat on 3D modeling.)
> OpenAI said on Wednesday that it was pushing for mandatory national AI safety requirements in the United States, citing concerns that advanced AI systems could accelerate its own development.
As well, the weaponisation of AI is already there, open ai can switch off safeguards at will. A massive swarm was allocated to solving Millenium problems in a few days. Imagine the US having such a weapon, they want to ensure other nations cannot have this kind of access. I imagine the US might be very interested in stifling globaal Innovation and be sympathetic to OpenAI for these reasons.
That’s one sneaky way to remove OpenAI responsibility…
I don't understand the psychology of showing an extremely capable product one week and then announcing a slow down the next.
So the “slowing down” narrative is a convenient story to spin.
The entire AI market is propped up on the hope that the models will magically solve all of these problems, and now that even Altman is realising they won't he needs the slowdown to stave of the crash for as long as he can.
> OpenAI said on Wednesday that it was pushing for mandatory national AI safety requirements in the United States, citing concerns that advanced AI systems could accelerate its own development.
They're doing no such thing. Altman is saying words ahead of the midterms.
This is a common tactic in any industry. Say that you will self-regulate, but then a decade or so later everybody wonders why anyone thought it was a good idea to allow an industry to make their own rules.
Astra has a lot of new capabilities but man, Armin once again being an early lead indicator, and in this case showing that the model seriously has some screws loose. https://lucumr.pocoo.org/2026/9/7/astra-why/ https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49654229
Claiming Skynet is just around the corner is a great way to get the public to believe only these huge companies can harness AI, and how all open-source models should be outlawed.
This is not open source and we really should stop conflating the two things.