Open-source AI is more dangerous than closed-source AI

endowing rogue nations or terrorists with tools to synthesize a deadly virus. [...] keep the “weights” of the most powerful models out of the public’s hands.

When you open source a big model and give people the weights [...] You get people using that open source model and training it, refining it to do something bad like cyberattacks or making biological weapons because it's much easier to refine the mode...

Nefarious actors can use open models maliciously, [...] whereas developers of closed models have more means to identify and disrupt this malicious use.

Open-Source AI Is Uniquely Dangerous [...] As things stand today, unsecured AI poses an enormous risk that we are not yet able to contain.

You basically have a bomb that you're making available for free, and you don’t have any way to defuse it necessarily. It’s just an obviously fallacious argument. We didn’t do that with nuclear weapons: we didn’t say ‘the way to protect the world fro...

Widely releasing the very advanced AI models of the future would be especially problematic, because preventing their misuse would be essentially impossible, he says, adding that they could enable rogue actors and nation-state adversaries to wage cybe...

But open sourcing, you know, that's just sheer catastrophe. The whole notion of open sourcing, this was always the wrong approach, the wrong ideal. There are places in the world where open source is a noble ideal and building stuff you don't understa...

These studies, on their own, are insufficient evidence to demonstrate increased marginal societal risk from open foundation models.

From a business perspective, the difference between open and closed is a little bit overblown. From a security perspective, the difference between open and closed models is, for some intents and purposes, overblown. The most important thing is how po...

I see the danger of this concentration of power through proprietary AI systems as a much bigger danger than everything else. What works against this is people who think that for reasons of security, we should keep AI systems under lock and key becaus...

Transparency is the greatest safeguard. [...] Open code and shared development will allow millions of young minds to make AI better and safer.

Open source does not eliminate risk. It changes how risk is managed. It allows more researchers, developers, and defenders to examine systems, test assumptions, surface weaknesses, and harden code under real-world conditions. [...] If frontier models...

Open-source AI allows the public to audit and verify algorithms, [...] It is also more secure because any attacks or exploits can be identified and remediated.

But the real danger lies in centralized, black-box systems that resist open auditing.

Open-source AI fosters innovation, improves security, and lowers costs—critical benefits for businesses, researchers, and everyday users around the world.

True, open-source models can be abused. But such thinking puts too much weight on the dangers of open-source AI and too little on the benefits.

America’s footprint in artificial intelligence is prodigious, and it is hard to overstate how consequential this is for the American national interest if it further develops with the right balance between innovation and guardrails. Into this new tech...

SB 1047 will stifle open source AI and hinder AI innovation [...] and therefore will make AI less safe.

I don't see any risk associated with open sourcing models. I only see benefits.

The researchers found that available evidence does not show that open models are riskier than closed models.

[...] an open innovation ecosystem and see the immense value of community-built technology as the best way to grow AI responsibly and mitigate potential misuse.

Lawmakers in Europe and California are worried that open-source AI is “dangerous.” On the contrary — there is nothing dangerous about transparency.

Since the launch of powerful open models like the Llama, Falcon, Mistral, and Stable Diffusion families, critics have pressed to keep other such genies in the bottle. "Open source software and open data can be an extraordinary resource for furthering...

Are open-source AI models more dangerous than closed models like GPT-4? A new study says no, and offers recommendations for policymakers. Open Foundation Models (OFMs) offer significant benefits by fostering competition, accelerating innovation, and...

open source is not more dangerous than closed source

Open source provides an opportunity for many people to examine those technologies, to test them in a variety of settings and to provide fixes.

Open source is powerful because everybody can help. If everything’s behind closed doors, nobody can understand how it works.