Researcher tenobrus: open-source superintelligence ends in power concentration, not freedom
tenobrus · x · 2026-09-15
AI safety researcher tenobrus laid out his core disagreement with open-source model advocates: he sees basically no path where open models produce real positive change.
- Not a ban-it-all-costs stance—he values freedom and would support open superintelligence if it reached a freer, more diverse equilibrium, but he doesn't see that path, nor clear arguments for it.
- Even if open models 10x'd past the closed frontier tomorrow, he argues resource-rich states and large entities would run vastly more instances, exploit their capabilities best, and use them to build smarter future models—yielding extreme power concentration.
- Instability from individuals might cause collapse, but it'd be temporary, and empowered states have convergent incentives to crush individual use of these models.
- He quips that the DeepSeek engineer's sought outcome still ends in massive concentration of power, "just with extra steps."
1a3orn pushed back, citing better alignment science, common knowledge of model behavior, less rent extraction, and harder surveillance as overlooked benefits of open source.
Related event: Debate: Do Open-Weight Models Diffuse or Concentrate Power?(4 posts)→
More from AGI Musings
- Panickssery: AI progress will eclipse safety discourse faster than the omnicause can absorb it — panickssery · 2026-09-15
- Stanford's Rishi Bommasani: frontier lab hires cost AI its public discourse voices — RishiBommasani · 2026-09-15
- AI researcher: doomers are well-meaning, and alignment research is the real answer — livgorton · 2026-09-15
- Box CEO Aaron Levie: we're only 1% into agentic workloads, background agent volume will be 100X — jobergum · 2026-09-15
- The Missing AI Safety Critique: EA's AI Spending Has a High Opportunity Cost — AaronBergman18 · 2026-09-15
- "General-purpose robots haven't even arrived yet — and it's already messy" — mayfer · 2026-09-15