We can't find the internet
Attempting to reconnect
Something went wrong!
Hang in there while we get back on track
Require AI labs to publish safety evaluations before deploying frontier models
policy
regulations
transparency
research-policy
ai-governance
ai-risk
ai-regulation
ai-ethics
ai-safety
Cast your vote:
Results (33 votes):
Total
(33 votes)
For 27 (82%)
Abstain 0 (0%)
Against 6 (18%)
·
For (24)
-
Miles KodamaAI policy researchervotes For and says:
Today, frontier AI developers have no legal obligation to disclose anything about their safety and security protocols to government, let alone to the public. When a company releases a new AI system more powerful than any system before, it is entirely...
more AI Verified source (2025)DelegateChoose a list of delegatesto vote as the majority of them.Unless you vote directly. -
Steven AdlerAI safety researcher; Lawfare writervotes For and says:
Before a new model's release, Al companies commonly (though not always) run safety tests - and release the results in a "System Card." The idea is to see if the model has any extreme abilities (like strong cyberhacking), and then to take an appropri...
more AI Verified source (2025)DelegateChoose a list of delegatesto vote as the majority of them.Unless you vote directly. -
Thomas WoodsideSecure AI Project co-foundervotes For and says:
Those updates should include the results of evaluations for models that haven’t been publicly deployed yet, since those models could also pose serious risks.
Unverifiable source (2025)DelegateChoose a list of delegatesto vote as the majority of them.Unless you vote directly. -
Office of Senator Scott WienerOfficial office of CA State Senatorvotes For and says:
help California develop workable guardrails for deploying GenAI [...] Companies will be required to publish their safety and security protocols and risk evaluations
Unverifiable source (2025)DelegateChoose a list of delegatesto vote as the majority of them.Unless you vote directly. -
Peter KyleUK shadow technology secretary, Labourvotes For and says:
That is why we will move from a voluntary code to a statutory code, so that those companies engaging in that kind of research and development have to release all the test data and tell us what they are testing for so we can see exactly what is happen...
more Unverifiable source (Feb 4, 2024)DelegateChoose a list of delegatesto vote as the majority of them.Unless you vote directly. -
Richard BlumenthalU.S. Senator from Connecticutvotes For and says:
Sensible safeguards are not in opposition to innovation. Accountability is not a burden far from it. They are the foundation of how we can move ahead while protecting public trust. They are how we can lead the world in technology and science, but als...
more Unverifiable source (2023)DelegateChoose a list of delegatesto vote as the majority of them.Unless you vote directly. -
Sam AltmanCEO at OpenAIvotes For and says:
First, it is vital that AI companies–especially those working on the most powerful models–adhere to an appropriate set of safety requirements, including internal and external testing prior to release and publication of evaluation results.
Unverifiable sourceDelegateChoose a list of delegatesto vote as the majority of them.Unless you vote directly. -
Adam GleaveCEO and founder of FAR.AI; AI safety researcher; UC Berkeley PhD in AI alignment and reward-hackingvotes For and says:
The central obstacle to AI safety coordination is not the absence of solutions but rather the absence of a standard: without a shared, legible definition of what makes an AI system safe, companies and governments have no basis for holding each other ...
more Disputed source (2026)DelegateChoose a list of delegatesto vote as the majority of them.Unless you vote directly. -
Helen TonerInterim Executive Director at Georgetown University's Center for Security and Emerging Technology (CSET); former OpenAI board membervotes For and says:
It's truly unprecedented the mismatch between how strategically important this technology is and how little involvement government has in developing it. [...] I think it is very important that the U.S. AI sector remains ahead of the Chinese AI sector...
more Disputed source (2026)DelegateChoose a list of delegatesto vote as the majority of them.Unless you vote directly. -
Marietje SchaakeStanford Cyber Policy Center; former MEP; UN AI Advisory Body member; author of The Tech Coupvotes For and says:
[It is] concerning that models with far-reaching impact are controlled by a private company. [...] Now would be a good time to agree on disclosure rules and oversight mechanisms.
Disputed source (2026)DelegateChoose a list of delegatesto vote as the majority of them.Unless you vote directly. -
Max TegmarkPhysicist, AI Researchervotes For and says:
You never have to worry that some drug company is going to release some other drug that causes massive harm before people have figured out how to make it safe, because the FDA won't allow them to release anything until it's safe enough. [...] In the ...
more Disputed source (2026)DelegateChoose a list of delegatesto vote as the majority of them.Unless you vote directly. -
Yoshua BengioAI Pioneer, Turing Award winnervotes For and says:
We're seeing AIs whose behavior, when they are tested, [...] is different from when they are being used. [This] significantly hampers our ability to correctly estimate risks. [...] The gap between the pace of technological advancement and our ability...
more Disputed source (2026)DelegateChoose a list of delegatesto vote as the majority of them.Unless you vote directly. -
Anu BradfordColumbia Law School professor; author of The Brussels Effect and Digital Empiresvotes For and says:
I am concerned about reforms being pushed further by corporate pressures, and about less resolute enforcement at a time when the AI race is heating up and geopolitical tensions are high. That combination increases the risk of irresponsible choices th...
more Disputed source (2026)DelegateChoose a list of delegatesto vote as the majority of them.Unless you vote directly. -
Alex BoresNew York State Assemblymembervotes For and says:
New York is poised to be the first government in the United States to do what Americans have been screaming for: require basic guardrails for AI safety. Developers have promised to keep us safe, and this bipartisan bill simply ensures that they keep ...
more Disputed source (2025) 1 of 2DelegateChoose a list of delegatesto vote as the majority of them.Unless you vote directly. -
Economic Security Project ActionPolicy advocacy organizationvotes For and says:
Building on the report’s “trust, but verify” approach, the amended bill requires the largest AI companies to publicly disclose their safety and security protocols and report the most critical safety incidents to the California Attorney General. The r...
more Unverifiable source (2025)DelegateChoose a list of delegatesto vote as the majority of them.Unless you vote directly. -
Dean W. BallAI policy writervotes For and says:
There is much to recommend these laws over the Nevada and Illinois bills I discussed above. Unlike those laws, SB 53 and RAISE are technically sophisticated, reflecting a clear understanding (for the most part) about what it is possible for AI develo...
more Unverified source (2025)DelegateChoose a list of delegatesto vote as the majority of them.Unless you vote directly. -
Rebecca Bauer-KahanCalifornia State Assembly membervotes For and says:
That is fundamentally the basis of this bill, is that they will be defining their own safety protocols. They will be making those public, and then they will have to follow them.
Unverified source (2025)DelegateChoose a list of delegatesto vote as the majority of them.Unless you vote directly. -
Office of Governor Kathy HochulNew York Governor's press officevotes For and says:
Governor Kathy Hochul today signed legislation to require AI frameworks for AI frontier models, setting a nation-leading standard for AI transparency and safety. The agreed-upon chapter amendments to the RAISE Act (S6953B/A6453B) requires large AI de...
more Unverified source (2025)DelegateChoose a list of delegatesto vote as the majority of them.Unless you vote directly. -
Office of Governor Gavin NewsomCalifornia Governor's Officevotes For and says:
SB 53 establishes new requirements for frontier AI developers creating stronger: ✅ Transparency: Requires large frontier developers to publicly publish a framework on its website describing how the company has incorporated national standards, intern...
more Unverified source (2025)DelegateChoose a list of delegatesto vote as the majority of them.Unless you vote directly. -
New York State SenateState legislative chamber, New Yorkvotes For and says:
The RAISE Act requires [...] frontier AI developers to write, implement, publish, and comply with plans [...] including how they assess the safety risks of their models.
Unverified source (2025)DelegateChoose a list of delegatesto vote as the majority of them.Unless you vote directly. -
Andrew GounardesNew York State Senatorvotes For and says:
It requires companies [...] to create and share [...] protocols before they deploy these models publicly. And then it requires [...] to complete an annual assessment [...].
Unverified source (2025)DelegateChoose a list of delegatesto vote as the majority of them.Unless you vote directly. -
Encode AIAI policy advocacy nonprofitvotes For and says:
They will require these companies to publish important information regarding their safety protocols and risk evaluations, and report major safety incidents to the Attorney General.
Unverified source (2025)DelegateChoose a list of delegatesto vote as the majority of them.Unless you vote directly. -
Partnership on AIAI governance nonprofit, multi-stakeholdervotes For and says:
Disclose details such as testing methodologies, evaluation criteria, results, limitations, and gaps for any internal and external evaluations conducted prior to release.
Unverified sourceDelegateChoose a list of delegatesto vote as the majority of them.Unless you vote directly. -
Federation of American ScientistsUS science policy nonprofitvotes For and says:
For models with risk above the lowest level, most evaluation results and methods should be public, including any performed mitigations.
Unverified sourceDelegateChoose a list of delegatesto vote as the majority of them.Unless you vote directly.
Abstain (0)
Against (6)
-
Andrew NgBaidu; Stanford CS faculty; founded Coursera and Google Brainvotes Against and says:
However, it is important to differentiate regulating applications (which we need) vs. regulating the technology (which is ill-advised).
AI Verified source (Dec 11, 2023)DelegateChoose a list of delegatesto vote as the majority of them.Unless you vote directly. -
Frontier Model ForumFrontier AI industry forumvotes Against and says:
[...] if the evaluation results indicate [...] an exploitable vulnerability that may lead to a significant increase in biorisks, this information should not be published.
Unverifiable source (Mar 18, 2025)DelegateChoose a list of delegatesto vote as the majority of them.Unless you vote directly. -
Neil ChilsonAI policy head, Abundance Institutevotes Against and says:
Those compliance costs are merely the beginning. The bill, if passed, would feed California regulators truckloads of company information that they will use to design a compliance industrial complex.
Unverified source (2025)DelegateChoose a list of delegatesto vote as the majority of them.Unless you vote directly. -
Chamber of ProgressTech industry policy associationvotes Against and says:
we still have lingering concerns about how the bill [...] fails to protect trade secrets necessary to maintain competitiveness.
Unverified source (2025)DelegateChoose a list of delegatesto vote as the majority of them.Unless you vote directly. -
Paul LekasSIIA public policy executivevotes Against and says:
These will require companies to publish detailed information and reports that could expose trade secrets and other sensitive information.
Unverified source (2025)DelegateChoose a list of delegatesto vote as the majority of them.Unless you vote directly. -
Jennifer HuddlestonSenior fellow, Cato Institutevotes Against and says:
Mandated transparency may also not actually improve consumer education around their privacy choices. First, many consumers may grow fatigued and frustrated with the constant pop ups and consents as they do with current cookie pop ups. Second, a gover...
more Disputed source (Jun 28, 2024)DelegateChoose a list of delegatesto vote as the majority of them.Unless you vote directly.
More
h/ai-safety
votes