Unfortunately, good compute governance takes time. E.g., if we want to implement hardware-based safety mechanisms, we first have to develop them, convince governments to implement them, and then they have to be put on the latest chips, which take several years to dominate compute.
This is a very interesting point.
I think that some “good compute governance” such as monitoring big training runs doesn’t require on-chip mechanisms but I agree that for any measure that would involve substantial hardware modifications, it would probably take a lot of time.
note that compute gov likely requires government levers, so this clashes a bit with you other statement
I agree that some governments might be involved but I think that it will look very differently from “national government policy”. My model of international coordination is that there are a couple of people involved in each government and what’s needed to move the position of these people (and thus of a country essentially) is not comparable with national policy.
This is a very interesting point.
I think that some “good compute governance” such as monitoring big training runs doesn’t require on-chip mechanisms but I agree that for any measure that would involve substantial hardware modifications, it would probably take a lot of time.
I agree that some governments might be involved but I think that it will look very differently from “national government policy”. My model of international coordination is that there are a couple of people involved in each government and what’s needed to move the position of these people (and thus of a country essentially) is not comparable with national policy.