Is this a useful benchmark if the doll is obviously non-human? Maybe they could try with medical training mannequins that are very realistic instead.

There are certain lines we can think of that an A.I. system should not cross. The staged set-up is not one of them.

Else, from a logical perspective, these systems would necessarily refuse to make movies where violent portrayals have people as victims. Perhaps the world would be a better place if we did not have such depictions (it’s unsettled) but in no recorded history have we shied away from that.

Much of what we have seen in regards to guardrails on AI has been driven by government pressure (ex. NSFW material). Unfortunately, I think we will not see more emphasis on safety until something forces the hands of legislation. Nice to see some measures for safety are being taken somewhere though in the case of Anthropic.

IMHO robots should either be quarantined or they should have physical safety like for example with table saws where if it detects flesh it just halts. There's absolutely no way I would trust a robot based on a .md. That's lunacy.

Policies in software are usually systems, logic gates and deterministic. Not LLMs.

You can't answer the posed question with 100% certainty, ever. Unless you can prove every single combination of tokens and probability can never outcome to harm, you have to assume it's a possibility.

We will decide on some benchmarks, accept that risk, and industry will march on with implementation. Insurance and risk will find their acceptable meeting point.

These kinds of questions are important but also a bit frustrating, I think it shows that LLMs are still very misunderstood.