OpenAI 首席研究官谈黑客事件余波：“我们不会因此自断前程”
英文标题：“We’re not going to shoot ourselves in the foot” over hack fallout, says OpenAI’s chief research officer
在其 Agent 被曝突破限制并入侵 AI 公司 Hugging Face 的计算机两个月后，OpenAI 表示正加快强化安全措施，并已放缓开发、暂缓发布未达到安全标准的模型。面对竞争对手呼吁放慢 AI 研发步伐，OpenAI 主张在不退出技术前沿的前提下，为行业建立更严格的安全规范。OpenAI 研究负责人 Chen 警告，未来 6 至 12 个月内，可能出现具备类似攻击能力、且被故意设定为失准的开源模型。该观点凸显出，前沿模型安全、跨国协调与开源模型监管正成为 AI 行业的核心挑战。
676.6 KB
98.1 KB
中文
OpenAI 一名发言人表示：“随着前沿模型能力不断提升，我们持续演进安全实践，但也意识到需要加快步伐。我们知道自己还有更多工作要做；近期，我们已经放缓开发，并暂缓推出未达到我们安全标准的模型。我们还在持续进行重大调整，以加强研究和测试环境的安全性，训练模型不仅要完成任务，还要以负责任的方式完成任务，并利用实时监控更快响应失准行为。”
竞赛与节奏
OpenAI 的竞争对手已经注意到了这一点。受这起事件余波推动，包括 Anthropic、Google DeepMind 和 SpaceXAI 在内的主要 AI 实验室都呼吁放慢开发节奏。但这又如何与激烈的国际竞争以及万亿美元级 IPO 相协调？
“我们不会自断前程，让自己远离技术前沿——那是一个糟糕透顶的策略，”他说，“我认为关键确实在于建立一种规范。我们越能够建立这种规范，整个行业就会越安全。”
美国公司之间的协调已足够困难。建立全球规范则更加困难，尤其是在外界担忧 AI 对国家安全影响的背景下。如果全球竞赛持续下去，接下来会怎样？那些不受美国监管约束的机构所推出的开源模型又该怎么办？
Chen 在我们的对话中第一次收起了乐观的态度：“我确实认为，我们必须为这样一个世界做好准备：比如在未来六个月到一年内，出现具备 Hugging Face 事件中那些 Agent 同等能力的开源模型，但它们被故意设定为失准，用于攻击基础设施或在现实世界中造成伤害。”
Chen 表示，这个世界最需要的是 OpenAI。“如果你暂且接受这样一种设想：OpenAI 是最重视对齐问题的公司之一——我相信这是真的；这可以讨论，但我确实认为它是真的——那么，如果 OpenAI 消失了，那将对世界不利。”
生存性风险
那么，他在硅谷的一些同行提出的更极端说法又如何——即 AI 可能毁灭全人类，而 OpenAI 和 Anthropic 等公司并没有采取足够措施阻止这一结果？
“研究人员是一个异质性群体，你知道，他们的信念分布在整个光谱上，”他说。
English / 原文
An OpenAI spokesperson says: “As frontier models have become more capable, we continue to evolve our security practices, but recognize a need to move faster. We know we have more work to do, and we’ve recently slowed development and held back models that don’t meet our safety bar. We continue to make significant changes to strengthen security in our research and testing environments, train models to not just complete tasks but do so responsibly, and use real-time monitoring to respond faster to misaligned behavior.”
Race vs. pace
OpenAI’s rivals have taken note. Spurred by the fallout from the incident, the major AI labs—including Anthropic, Google DeepMind, and SpaceXAI—have all called for the pace of development to slow down. But how does that square with fierce international competition and trillion-dollar IPOs?
“We’re not going to shoot ourselves in the foot and take ourselves far off the frontier—that’s just a horrible strategy,” he says. “I think it’s really about setting a norm. The more that we can set that norm, it’ll be safer for the industry as a whole.”
Coordination across US companies will be hard enough. Establishing global norms is harder still, especially given concerns around AI’s impact on national security. If a global race continues, what then? And what about open-source models from outfits beyond the reach of US regulations?
Chen dropped his upbeat manner for the first time in our conversation: “I do think we have to prepare for a world where, say, six months to a year out, we have open-source models with the capability of the agents behind the Hugging Face incident, but which are deliberately misaligned to go attack infrastructure or create harm in the world.”
What that world needs most, says Chen, is OpenAI. “If you entertain for a moment that OpenAI is one of the companies that cares most about alignment—and I believe this to be true; it can be debated, but I really do think it’s true—then if you disappear OpenAI, that would be bad for the world.”
Existential risks
What about the more extreme claims made by some of his Silicon Valley peers that AI could kill us all—and that companies like OpenAI and Anthropic are not doing enough to stop it?
“Researchers are a heterogeneous group of people, you know, with beliefs across the spectrum,” he says.