[3] - he does express worry over the risks of open models -- much as he has long expressed worry over his own models (and AI safety was the primary reason for Anthropic's founding) -- but he does not even imply that they should be banned, and he even explicitly says there is nothing that can be done to stop open models from being distributed.

For completeness's sake:

[1] The primary linked source seems to also be the 2023 testimony, albeit posted with a timestamp from this week.

[2] Does not seem to quote Dario, nor mention banning - I think you included this as an example of someone else who is explicitly worried about AI risks, including of models that can't be pulled back -- fair enough (although I can't see that they have any association with a frontier lab). If the argument is that many people have concerns about AI risks, including risks specific to open models, and who are not associated with a frontier lab, I agree with you.

What current local models work fine for is delegating clearly-described tasks in a code base the programmer actually understands. Qwen3.6 27B and DeepSeek V4 Flash are both great little workhorses.

There's also GLM 5.2, which is kind of like "store brand Opus", and which might be considered a "near-frontier" model. I don't have as much experience with it.

i would argue that no one knows answer to that yet.

I'm thinking more of the small tasks that are often needed. Mending fences. Pulling weeds. Feeding chickens. Running off coyotes. Lots of things.

The greater question centres about who will tend the machines - 4,000 hectares of seeding requires a week and more of prep work on the air seeder, hoses, points, tines, etc.