Claim and evidence Close ×
Bostrom's paper of 2017 argues that, while short-term effects of openness appear mostly beneficial, openness about source code, science and possibly capability could make the race to advanced AI more closely competitive and so make it harder to pause for, or to afford, safety measures. Copy claim link
Copy claim reference
Machine-checked, not reviewed by an editor Stated in source Supported
Supporting evidence: primary · 1 source; Context: primary · 1 source
Date 2017 · publication Records dated 2017 → Role Contesting Register (kind of text) Nonfiction Engagement Engages a premise. Answers the premise that wider access and scrutiny improve safety by arguing that openness tightens competition and so squeezes safety work. Scope and limits The paper distinguishes forms of openness and judges openness about safety measures and goals plausibly positive; it calls itself a preliminary analysis. It is about openness in AI development generally, not model weights specifically.
The evidence 03 primary source Supports the claim
Strategic Implications of Openness in AI Development ↗ Author's site (nickbostrom.com); published in Global Policy 8(2), 2017, doi:10.1111/1758-5899.12403 · 2017
Copy source reference
Cite the original source Cite the original document, not Selekoa. Check these details against it.
Copy APA
Download BibTeX Download RIS Download CSL-JSON
Source excerpt “Others (openness about source code, science, and possibly capability) could lead to a tightening of the competitive situation around the time of the introduction of advanced AI” Location in source Abstract, PDF p. 1
How it was read Retrieved directly from the publisher
Machine-checked · 2026-10-31
Source details and check notes Authors Nick Bostrom Version Retrieved for the candidate pack on 2026-10-29 (SHA-256 7c35bcb1a62fdec1093ca9e4faa122a1c7d4ee088f2fe784ea9aef70c8dd792b). Published version PDF (Global Policy, open access) as served on the author's site; no archive capture compared. Canonical address Open the canonical source ↗ Accessed 2026-10-29 Language English (en) Attribution Nick Bostrom, “Strategic Implications of Openness in AI Development”, 2017. Reuse No open redistribution licence asserted. Bibliographic metadata, editorial paraphrases and short attributed quotations (at most 50 words each). Recheck terms before wider redistribution. Check notes Candidate pack passage, arguments about catastrophic risk from advanced AI (research/risk-debate). The quotation (27 words) matched the text retrieved for the candidate pack on 2026-10-29. Matching ignored differences of whitespace, case, quotation marks, dashes and Unicode compatibility forms, so the source’s typography can differ. No human editorial review. primary source Supports the claim
Strategic Implications of Openness in AI Development ↗ Author's site (nickbostrom.com); published in Global Policy 8(2), 2017, doi:10.1111/1758-5899.12403 · 2017
Copy source reference
Cite the original source Cite the original document, not Selekoa. Check these details against it.
Copy APA
Download BibTeX Download RIS Download CSL-JSON
Source excerpt “It would make it harder to pause towards the end in order to implement or test a safety mechanism. It would also make it harder to use any safety mechanism that reduces efficiency.” Location in source Section "Openness making AI development race more closely competitive", PDF p. 8
How it was read Retrieved directly from the publisher
Machine-checked · 2026-10-31
Source details and check notes Authors Nick Bostrom Version Retrieved for the candidate pack on 2026-10-29 (SHA-256 7c35bcb1a62fdec1093ca9e4faa122a1c7d4ee088f2fe784ea9aef70c8dd792b). Published version PDF (Global Policy, open access) as served on the author's site; no archive capture compared. Canonical address Open the canonical source ↗ Accessed 2026-10-29 Language English (en) Attribution Nick Bostrom, “Strategic Implications of Openness in AI Development”, 2017. Reuse No open redistribution licence asserted. Bibliographic metadata, editorial paraphrases and short attributed quotations (at most 50 words each). Recheck terms before wider redistribution. Check notes Candidate pack passage, arguments about catastrophic risk from advanced AI (research/risk-debate). The quotation (33 words) matched the text retrieved for the candidate pack on 2026-10-29. Matching ignored differences of whitespace, case, quotation marks, dashes and Unicode compatibility forms, so the source’s typography can differ. No human editorial review. primary source Context only
Strategic Implications of Openness in AI Development ↗ Author's site (nickbostrom.com); published in Global Policy 8(2), 2017, doi:10.1111/1758-5899.12403 · 2017
Copy source reference
Cite the original source Cite the original document, not Selekoa. Check these details against it.
Copy APA
Download BibTeX Download RIS Download CSL-JSON
Source excerpt “Short-term impacts of increased openness appear mostly socially beneficial in expectation.” Location in source Abstract, PDF p. 1
How it was read Retrieved directly from the publisher
Machine-checked · 2026-10-31
Source details and check notes Authors Nick Bostrom Version Retrieved for the candidate pack on 2026-10-29 (SHA-256 7c35bcb1a62fdec1093ca9e4faa122a1c7d4ee088f2fe784ea9aef70c8dd792b). Published version PDF (Global Policy, open access) as served on the author's site; no archive capture compared. Canonical address Open the canonical source ↗ Accessed 2026-10-29 Language English (en) Attribution Nick Bostrom, “Strategic Implications of Openness in AI Development”, 2017. Reuse No open redistribution licence asserted. Bibliographic metadata, editorial paraphrases and short attributed quotations (at most 50 words each). Recheck terms before wider redistribution. Check notes Candidate pack passage, arguments about catastrophic risk from advanced AI (research/risk-debate). The quotation (11 words) matched the text retrieved for the candidate pack on 2026-10-29. Matching ignored differences of whitespace, case, quotation marks, dashes and Unicode compatibility forms, so the source’s typography can differ. The paper's own qualification of its finding. No human editorial review. Status and meaning Editorial status. Not reviewed by an editor . An exploratory record that no editor has accepted. This status does not say whether a person has read any linked passage. Each evidence record above shows how it was checked.
Relation. A passage of the document disputes the proposition or a premise it depends on. The record documents the text’s position, not who is right.
Date. Date of publication, as the source gives it.
Record ID rd-r15-bostrom-2017-openness