Some of my friends are signal-boosting this new article: 60 U.K. Lawmakers Accuse Google of Breaking AI Safety Pledge. See also the open letter. I don't feel good about this critique or the implicit ask.

1. Sharing information on capabilities is good but public deployment is a bad time for that, in part because most risk comes from internal deployment.
2. Google didn't necessarily even break a commitment? The commitment mentioned in the article is to "publicly report model or system capabilities." That doesn't say it has to be done at the time of public deployment.
   1. The White House voluntary commitments included a commitment to "publish reports for all new significant model public releases"; same deal there.
   2. Possibly Google broke a different commitment (mentioned in the open letter): "Assess the risks posed by their frontier models or systems across the AI lifecycle, including before deploying that model or system." Depends on your reading of "assess the risks" plus facts which I don't recall off the top of my head.
3. Other companies are doing far worse in this dimension. At worst Google is 3rd-best in publishing eval results. Meta and xAI are far worse.