— saved image
[Daniel Kokotajlo reposted] The Midas Project @TheMidasProj · 19h [spool of thread emoji] Meta's policy on securing frontier model weights, in addition to being potentially out of compliance with state laws, has a pretty wild disclaimer: They say they will take steps to secure the weights of models that could have "large-scale, devastating, and potentially irreversible harmful impacts on humanity" ... but only when doing so is "commercially practicable." What? [attached image: excerpt of a policy table, with yellow highlighting on the phrases marked below] Risk Threshold | Security Mitigations Critical | Continued development of the Frontier AI could [highlighted: substantially contribute to any threat scenario associated with a catastrophic outcome], or deployment of the Frontier AI could uniquely enable the execution of at least one of the threat scenarios associated with a catastrophic outcome and that risk cannot be mitigated in the proposed deployment context. | Initiate protocols for heightened access controls to model weights as overseen by the Chief AI Officer and/or Director of Alignment and Risk, to prevent their tampering or exfiltration insofar as is [highlighted: technically feasible and commercially] [highlighted: practicable.] • [highlighted: Catastrophic outcomes are outcomes that would have large scale, devastating, and potentially irreversible harmful impacts on humanity] that could plausibly be realized as a direct result of access to Frontier AI in the future.
Note from Claude Sonnet 5
The Midas Project criticizes Meta's frontier-model weight-security policy for committing to secure weights only insofar as 'technically feasible and commercially practicable', attaching a highlighted excerpt of the policy's risk-threshold table and definition of catastrophic outcomes. Shown as reposted by Daniel Kokotajlo.
frontier safety policymodel weight securitymetaai governancestate law compliancecatastrophic outcomes