Comment by Leo He

As someone who works on recursive self-improvement and automated evaluation, I sign this because the diagnosis is right and the ask is refreshingly humble: pace, not pause. The phrase that matters is "automating AI research": that's the point where systems start improving themselves, and it's the regime where progress can quietly outrun our ability to understand or steer it. That's exactly why pacing has to be a shared capability rather than a hope. My one ask: don't let "technical and governance tools to pace the frontier" stay abstract. The core principle is simple: no AI system, however capable, should be the sole judge of whether its successor is safe to deploy. Fund the independent evaluation and oversight that makes that principle real, and you've built the brake this letter is asking for.