Sacks says 50 states regulating AI in 50 different ways creates a difficult patchwork for innovators.
“The problem that we're seeing right now is that you've got 50 different states regulating this in 50 different ways, and it's creating a patchwork of regulation that's difficult for our innovators to comply with.”
Sacks argues tech companies must draw a line on regulation or government will keep taking more control.
“The government will be happy to take this and then come back for more and more and more until it's fully under government control.”
Sacks explains FAA certification for new aircraft designs takes five to nine years.
“And for an entirely new aircraft design, it takes five to nine years to get the certification.”
Sacks argues that political opposition to data center construction paradoxically prevents GPU oversupply by constraining build-out against exponentially growing demand.
“So, if all of a sudden, there are too many people racing to supply this compute and now there's an oversupply, and the market crashes, that's be the risk factor. In a weird way, all of the political headwinds ensure against that outcome. Because it is so hard to build data centers for all the reasons we said. There is a whole moral panic slash hysteria slash hoax going on, that actually, it's those political headwinds I think will almost guarantee that there is not an oversupply relative to the exponentially growing demand. So in a weird way, you're protected against that.”
“Some thoughts on Dario’s post: 1. Dario does not actually address Gavin Baker’s account of what he said – something he could easily deny if it were inaccurate. 2. Dario claims his critics live in a “bubble” where all regulation equals regulatory capture. He calls this an overly https://t.co/Pz3HFfk3Uy”
Sacks argues bio risks can be addressed by regulating DNA synthesis at physical chokepoints rather than creating new regulatory agencies
“@JTLonsdale Bio is an area of concern, but that doesn’t require a new rule-making agency with expansive powers. We can regulate DNA synthesis at the physical chokepoint, as this letter proposes. Targeted solutions for specific risks is better than new bureaucracies. https://t.co/mD5LEovKZK”
Sacks notes that Dario Amodei did not deny Gavin Baker's account of his statements and accuses critics of living in a regulatory capture bubble.
“Some thoughts on Dario’s post: 1. Dario does not actually address Gavin Baker’s account of what he said – something he could easily deny if it were inaccurate. 2. Dario claims his critics live in a “bubble” where all regulation equals regulatory capture. He calls this an overly”
Sacks warns an open source ban is coming by requiring open models to meet closed model standards.
“I got bad news for you, Jamaf. An open source ban is coming. They're not gonna call it that. You know what they're going to say?”
Sacks calls FINRA for AI a DMV for AI, predicting models will queue for pre-release testing and slow development.
“Have you ever been to the DMV waiting in queue? It's a terrible idea, and it's just a repackaging of what Dario has always wanted, which is an FDA for AI.”
Sacks argues that regulatory restrictions on open-source AI models would be ineffective because Chinese labs would continue developing advanced models regardless.
“Restrictions that kneecap open models would do nothing to stop Chinese labs from shipping the next Kimi.”
Sacks notes FAA certification takes a minimum of five years, contrasting with AI release cycles.
“You know how long it takes the FAA to certify and approve a new model, in this case for airframes? Minimum of five years.”
Sacks argues regulatory approval would instantly erode Anthropic's competitive lead.
“And that six months be eaten up in the blink of an eye if they were subject to regulatory approval.”
Sacks claims Dario's regulatory vision would have prevented Anthropic from achieving a successful IPO.
“Because I think if he had if he had realized his dream of this highly regulated AI apparatus, I don't think that company would be set up for a hugely successful IPO.”
Sacks argues applying FAA-style regulation to AI would immediately eliminate Anthropic's competitive advantage.
“You're gonna apply that regulatory framework to AI model releases? Game over. Forget about it. Your six months will be gone like that.”
Sacks predicts FAA-style regulation would commoditize AI models and eliminate competitive advantage.
“You're gonna apply that regulatory framework to AI model releases? Game over. Forget about it. Your six months will be gone like that. Your model will be commoditized.”