https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coordinated_vulnerability_disclosure

Someone else will eventually figure it out. They probably have less scruples and will therefore profit.

Seems to me like there's always an incentive structure for prisoner's dilemma type shit to eventually pay off for the authoritarians in the end. You can play the game, but you can't break it or stop or from being rigged without consequences. Even just releasing some research papers will get you a few decades in the fed.

I figured out how to remove most of the safeguards from some AI models.

Nice.

How do you feel about this?

It's another kind of power. I try to use mine responsibly, but also to give myself a break when I don't meet my own standards.

Some good advice I got once was that it's impossible to "un-say" something, so it pays to think twice before speaking.

If your gut is telling you to pause, listen to it. Wait to move forward until you feel better about it.

As someone else pointed out, responsible disclosure is an option.

You also have the option to just quietly enjoy a better copy of the AI than others have.

If you decide to publish your discoveries, be aware that others will judge you for how you go about it. For me that means the two options are responsibly, or anonymously.

Idk, I still think information wants to be free. If you figured it out just farting around, sophisticated malevolent actors are likely already doing similar things. Might be better to let the genie out of the bottle, so people can learn to be skeptical. Deep fakes are optimally effective when a majority still accepts the veracity of images as an article of faith.

I don't see the ethics implications of sharing that? What would happen if you did disclose your discoveries/techniques?

I don't know much about LLMs, but doesn't removing these safeguards just make the model as a whole less useful?