If a model were capable of novel WMD research, I would want it to stay out of reach for the general public! Wouldn't you? After we split the atom, and saw how

If a model were capable of novel WMD research, I would want it to stay out of reach for the general public! Wouldn't you? After we split the atom, and saw how dangerous it was, we established some damn strong protections in place to prevent kids from building nukes in their backyards for giggles. If we ever build a physicist AI that is better than Einstein at WMD-relevant research, I sure as hell hope we don't just let the kids ask it how to build nukes or antimatter bombs or whatever. And this is exactly what this regulation is about. > But what the text says is different. Since "prohibited" is a word that carries specific consequences, and lawyers are all about consequences, legal texts usually phrase it something like "if a model does critical harm to humans, the human responsible for building and releasing the model will be culpable for the crime", which is a very good TL;DR of the relevant parts of the bill. Isn't it?