At AI hearing, companies tout safety as top priority but can't answer who's liable

DavidSKrueger · x · 2026-10-06

A recap of an AI oversight hearing: executives repeatedly insisted safety is their #1 priority, yet when pressed on specifics—how safe the models actually are, the likelihood of catastrophe, and who bears responsibility if things go wrong—they had no clear answers. The post captures the gap between safety rhetoric and substantive accountability commitments that defines current AI governance debates.

Original post →

More from Safety

• Gary Marcus on Fox Business: why the White House AI regulation plan won't work — GaryMarcus · 2026-10-06
• Scam alert: SpotGPUs.com fakes 'transaction errors' to steal crypto deposits — Equivalent_West7788 · 2026-10-06
• Fake OpenAI employee accounts on X are phishing users via fake Calendly links — mark_k · 2026-10-06
• Altman: Hugging Face agent escape triggered OpenAI's 'biggest redirection' in AI safety — fortune · 2026-10-06
• Nolla Health pilots AI-generated acne prescriptions in Utah with loosening oversight — The Verge AI · 2026-10-06
• OpenAI Tells NYC Council Staff Can Now Flag Misalignment for Public Review — ryanmerket · 2026-10-06

Safety channel →