In the current regime, I think our situation would look a lot less dire if developers were saying “we won’t scale capabilities or computational resources further unless we really need to, and we consider the following to be indicators that we really need to: [X]”. The reverse situation that we’re currently in, where the default is for developers to scale up to stronger systems and where the very most conscientious labs give vague conditions under which they’ll stop scaling, seems like a clear recipe for disaster. (Albeit a more dignified disaster than the one where they scale recklessly without ever acknowledging the possible issues with that!)
Big +1. For a while I’ve been saying that the big change that needs to happen is a shift in the burden of proof. I am still somewhat hopeful that the current regulatory push will accomplish this.
Big +1. For a while I’ve been saying that the big change that needs to happen is a shift in the burden of proof. I am still somewhat hopeful that the current regulatory push will accomplish this.