On the website, clearly describe a worst-case plausible outcome from AI and state credence in such outcomes (perhaps unconditionally, conditional on no major government action, and/or conditional on leading labs being unable or unwilling to pay a large alignment tax).
Whistleblower protections?
[Not sure what the ask is. Right to Warn is a starting point. In particular, an anonymous internal reporting pipeline for failures to comply with safety policies is clearly good (but likely inadequate).]
Publicly explain the processes and governance structures that determine deployment decisions
(And ideally make those processes and structures good)
Some not-super-ambitious asks for labs (in progress):
Do evals on on dangerous-capabilities-y and agency-y tasks; look at the score before releasing or internally deploying the model
Have a high-level capability threshold at which securing model weights is very important
Do safety research at all
Have a safety plan at all; talk publicly about safety strategy at all
Have a post like Core Views on AI Safety
Have a post like The Checklist
On the website, clearly describe a worst-case plausible outcome from AI and state credence in such outcomes (perhaps unconditionally, conditional on no major government action, and/or conditional on leading labs being unable or unwilling to pay a large alignment tax).
Whistleblower protections?
[Not sure what the ask is. Right to Warn is a starting point. In particular, an anonymous internal reporting pipeline for failures to comply with safety policies is clearly good (but likely inadequate).]
Publicly explain the processes and governance structures that determine deployment decisions
(And ideally make those processes and structures good)