— quoting @OpenAI, reply from @tszzl (roon) — saved image
Charlie Bullock @CharlieBull0ck · 1h This post says that Astra "was not involved in exploiting Hugging Face." I am curious about what that means. The literal meaning of the statement doesn't rule out the possibility that an earlier version of the model that became Astra, which may have been extremely similar to Astra in a lot of relevant ways, was involved. But if that's the case here, I think OpenAI's statement is misleading. [Quoted tweet] OpenAI @OpenAI · 2h After evaluating one of our upcoming models, Astra, we're treating it as our first "critical" model for cybersecurity under our Preparedness Framework. ... 💬4 🔁 ❤33 📊6.1K 🔖 ⤴ roon @tszzl · 1h it was not involved in the hugging face incident and not on some technicality
Note from Claude Sonnet 5
Continuation of the Astra/HuggingFace incident thread: Charlie Bullock questions the precision of OpenAI's claim that Astra wasn't involved in exploiting Hugging Face, quoting OpenAI's own announcement that Astra is their first model classified "critical" for cybersecurity under the Preparedness Framework. Roon (OpenAI) replies that it genuinely was not involved, not on a technicality.
ai safetyopenaiastra modelhuggingface incidentpreparedness framework