<i>“We were wrong. Flat out, we were wrong. If you believe, as we do, that at some point, AI — AGI — is going to be extremely, unbelievably potent, then it just does not make sense to open-source. It is a bad idea... I fully expect that in a few years it’s going to be completely obvious to everyone that open-sourcing AI is just not wise.”</i><p>I could not disagree more with this sentiment. IF you take it as a given that AGI is going to exist, then I believe that the ONLY way to ensure it is used in a safe and equitable manner is if everybody has it. AGI that is controlled by one small group of actors is <i>exactly</i> the scenario we want to avoid.<p>I'll give them the benefit of the doubt and assume this argument is offered in good faith, and isn't just a disingenuous smokescreen to avoid saying "we want to make all t3h money and we can't do that if we share our research freely". But I have to be honest... it's hard to sustain that belief. Especially given their transition away from being a non-profit organization.