Yo Shavit @yonashav
— quoting @thlarsen, reposted by Eric Schmidt — saved image
Eric Schmidt 🇺🇦 reposted Yo Shavit (verified) @yonashav · 1h I do think it’s becoming extremely important that AI companies work out an extremely-narrow ZDR exemption to facilitate competitors’ high-risk agent monitoring (probably batch-async, and hosted on neutral cloud like AWS). This is too central and load-bearing an anti-collusion intervention to take off the table due to distillation fears. [Quoted post:] Thomas Larsen (verified) @thlarsen · 1h They should obviously have let claude read the transcripts x.com/RyanGreenblatt… [Embedded image excerpt, with "we relied on GPT-5.6 Sol agents" highlighted in blue:] ▾ We heavily delegated our analysis to often-unreliable AI agents Due to the scale of the data we were working with, we relied on GPT-5.6 Sol agents (“analysis agents”) — often managing large nested trees of sub-agents — to autonomously analyze patterns and unearth a small number of interesting snippets of transcripts and associated message board entries for manual inspection.
Note from Claude Sonnet 5
Repost of a Yo Shavit post arguing AI companies need a narrow ZDR exemption to let competitors monitor high-risk agents as an anti-collusion measure, quoting Thomas Larsen's reply that they should have let Claude read the transcripts, with an embedded report excerpt about delegating analysis to GPT-5.6 Sol agents.
agent monitoringzero data retentionanti-collusiondistillationai safetygpt-5.6 soltranscript analysis