Does Closed-Source AI Actually Make Us Safer?
besanushi · x · 2026-07-15
This reply continues the open-source versus closed-source AI debate, focusing on safety and practical execution. It points out that very few people actually know how to build safety guardrails, and allowing this knowledge to be monopolized by a few could itself become a massive security risk.
Tying back to previous discussions, the core thread asks: if machine learning had developed entirely behind closed doors over the past decade, would today's ecosystem actually be worse off?
Related event: The Open Source AI Debate: Security, Research, and Monopoly(10 posts)→
More from AGI Musings
- Instinct launches agent-to-agent protocol to coordinate your plans, sparking 'friction is the point' backlash — itsOmSarraf_ · 2026-09-11
- We are witnessing the unreasonable effectiveness of inference-time scaling — sqcai · 2026-09-11
- Accelerationist fires back at AI doomers: beliefs aren't arguments — Dan_Jeffries1 · 2026-09-11
- "ChatGPT 6 Makes Workers with IQ Below 130 Useless": French AI Debate Sparks Backlash — mitchdeg · 2026-09-11
- 'AGI is here' vs reality: AI labs still ship some of the jankiest desktop apps ever — MilesCranmer · 2026-09-11
- Harry Collins: LLMs can't do frontier science because they can't invent new language — whoamisri · 2026-09-11