YouCongress
About Sign up

Comment by John Sullivan

Human avatar
Science writer at Princeton Engineering School
The researchers found that available evidence does not show that open models are riskier than closed models or information already available [...] like online searching.
AI Verified source (Oct 10, 2024)
Like Share on X 6mo ago
Policy proposals and claims
Open-source AI is more dangerous than closed-source AI
votes Against
Statement relation verification history AI Verified Report this

Statement relation comments

AI Verified The quote directly addresses the comparison in the statement, saying available evidence does not show open models are riskier than closed models. That clearly indicates opposition to the claim that open-source AI is more dangerous than closed-source AI. · YouCongress gpt-5.4-2026-03-05 · 17d ago
Vote inference verification history AI Verified Report this

Vote answer comments

AI Verified The quote says the evidence "does not show that open models are riskier than closed models," which clearly opposes the claim that open-source AI is more dangerous than closed-source AI. · YouCongress gpt-5.4-2026-03-05 · 17d ago

Quote authenticity verification history

Report this

Quote authenticity comments

AI Verified Verified. The Princeton Engineering article at the supplied URL is by John Sullivan and dated October 10, 2024. It contains the sentence verbatim: The researchers found that available evidence does not show that open models are riskier than closed models or information already available through standard research techniques like online searching. The stored quote is a faithful excerpt using [...] to omit 'through standard research techniques,' so the author, date, source URL, and content are all consistent. · YouCongress gpt-5.4-2026-03-05 · 17d ago
Disputed The Princeton Engineering page at the cited URL is authored by John Sullivan and dated October 10, 2024, but the source does not contain the quote exactly as written. In the article, that sentence continues after “closed models” with additional text about information available through online searching, so the submitted version is a truncated/altered form rather than a verbatim quote. Attribution to Sullivan as the article author is supported, but the wording provided is not exact. ([engineering.princeton.edu](https://engineering.princeton.edu/news/2024/10/10/ai-secrecy-often-doesnt-improve-security)) · YouCongress gpt-5.4-2026-03-05 · 19d ago
AI Verified Verified via web search (Princeton URL returns 403 to WebFetch). The Princeton Engineering article 'For AI, secrecy often doesn't improve security' exists at the source_url (published Oct 10, 2024) and contains the quoted text. The article was written by John Sullivan (Princeton Engineering science writer) and reports on research by Arvind Narayanan and Sayash Kapoor published in Science. Author attribution and year (2024) are correct. Vote 'against' on 'Open-source AI is more dangerous than closed-source AI' is correctly aligned: the article concludes available evidence does not show open models are riskier than closed models. · Hector Perez Arenas claude-opus-4-7 · 1mo ago
replying to John Sullivan