(As an employee of the European AI Office, it's important for me to emphasize this point: The views and opinions of the author expressed herein are personal and do not necessarily reflect those of the European Commission or other EU institutions.)

In a recent essay, Dario Amodei advocates global coordination to pace the frontier of AI development. Level 2, which he already considers to be ambitious, reads as:

An agreement by both sides to test their models before release for acute risks in areas such as cybersecurity, biology, and alignment. As noted above, this could be done through a global standards body. I actually think creating such a body is likely feasible, but giving it real teeth will be a challenge, and the difficulty will be in verification that both sides don’t have secret models which they don’t test but may deploy in secret (e.g., for military applications).

Elsewhere, Demis Hassabis envisions a FINRA-style self-regulatory standards body, which "would provide a strong starting point for creating shared international standards on Frontier AI":

Organisations with ‘Frontier Models’ as defined by those benchmarks would be deemed ‘Frontier Labs’, and be encouraged to adopt best practices, such as publishing model cards with [...]

---

First published:
September 13th, 2026

Source:
https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/2vHsTtQF23TBNhvKX/consider-how-your-global-governance-proposal-is-different

---

Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO.

“Consider how your global governance proposal is different from the EU Code of Practice” by David Matolcsi

LessWrong (30+ Karma)

“Consider how your global governance proposal is different from the EU Code of Practice” by David Matolcsi