I’m not familiar with the executive director, Chris Meserole.
The associated red-teaming post seems ~worthless; it fails to establish anything like best practices or commitments. Most of the post is the four labs saying how they’ve done red-teaming; picking on Microsoft because its deployment of Bing Chat was the most obviously related to a failure of red-teaming, Microsoft fails to acknowledge this or discuss what they plan to do differently.
The AI Safety Fund seems better than nothing and I tentatively expect it to mostly be used well. It’s not big enough to be a big deal, and it’s not clear how much of it comes from the companies vs philanthropists.
The Forum has said nothing on extreme risks or the alignment problem, I think.
Also no details on how the Forum works.
My guess is that most of the Forum’s value will come from sharing model evals and standards which can be incorporated into regulation and binding standards. Not clear how good those evals/standards will be. If it’s just codifying what these four labs are already doing, that would be very insufficient. I unfortunately don’t get a vibe of ambitious-best-practices-setting from today’s update.
I was really excited about the Frontier Model Forum. This update seems… lacking; I was expecting more on commitments and best practices.
I’m not familiar with the executive director, Chris Meserole.
The associated red-teaming post seems ~worthless; it fails to establish anything like best practices or commitments. Most of the post is the four labs saying how they’ve done red-teaming; picking on Microsoft because its deployment of Bing Chat was the most obviously related to a failure of red-teaming, Microsoft fails to acknowledge this or discuss what they plan to do differently.
The AI Safety Fund seems better than nothing and I tentatively expect it to mostly be used well. It’s not big enough to be a big deal, and it’s not clear how much of it comes from the companies vs philanthropists.
The Forum has said nothing on extreme risks or the alignment problem, I think.
Also no details on how the Forum works.
My guess is that most of the Forum’s value will come from sharing model evals and standards which can be incorporated into regulation and binding standards. Not clear how good those evals/standards will be. If it’s just codifying what these four labs are already doing, that would be very insufficient. I unfortunately don’t get a vibe of ambitious-best-practices-setting from today’s update.