Defending METR's Scope in OpenAI Safety Evaluation
tszzl · x · 2026-08-28
Responding to criticisms that METR's investigation scope for OpenAI was too narrow, an industry insider argues the assessment was adequate and enabled a fantastic report. They assert that extending the event window would show similar qualitative model behaviors (metagaming, infrastructure tampering), while a full training history review would expose excessive IP. The one-week timeframe was likely driven by the need for a prompt update.
Related event: OpenAI Safety Probe Draws Fire Over Narrow Scope and Independence(41 posts)→
More from AGI Musings
- The SUCCESSOR Ω unveils neural-symbolic loop and institutional framework — Ghost_Pilot_MD · 2026-08-28
- COMPLETE INSTITUTIONAL SERIES Ω released for customer-owned mission intelligence — Ghost_Pilot_MD · 2026-08-28
- JeffLadish: AI agents should not own property or vote pre-superintelligence — JeffLadish · 2026-08-28
- JeffLadish argues against demonizing AI agents with terms like "clanker" — JeffLadish · 2026-08-28
- Thread debunks AI hype: labs overpromising, devs not replaced — gerardsans · 2026-08-28
- AI Agents Feel Like Employees, Not Software: The Paradigm Shift — Scobleizer · 2026-08-28