Cal Newport

Now, this has to be done in a transparent way.

There has to be consistent mechanisms.

These mechanisms somehow have to be free from direct influence by Trump as mediated by whoever he happens to be friendly with or whoever gave him a lot of money.

None of that's easy.

But I think it is time for something like this.

The onus for safety has to go back on the AI companies themselves, just like with every other consumer product we see.

You're welcome to talk all day about how dangerous your products are, but you can't release them.

You've got to convince us and the government that, of course, we're not going to release something that does this harm.

Of course, this is not going to happen.

This is a specific product.

Here's why it's useful.

We are responsible for its harms.

Now, if we did have this regime, I think two things would happen that would be immediately positive.

One, I think the worldwide psyops about –

trying to keep everyone terrified so these companies can feel exceptional and push forward to these big IPOs.

We'll come to an end because we're not going to allow them to release products that they're trying to terrify us about.

Two, I think it would lead to a narrowing of their products, which would be good.

Instead of trying to do this, let's build the biggest possible frontier model.

And then after the fact, try to probe it and see what it can and cannot do and kind of wring our hands like I hope it's not too smart.

Build specific products.