It is premature to call this a bug.

Have they already used open weights models to evaluate their codebase/hardware?

He writes: “Open weight models, on the other hand, allow a broad
community of researchers and developers to examine their behavior, identify vulnerabilities, develop safeguards, and improve them over time.”

This is true in the shortterm. In the longterm (or not so longterm), we are talking about evaluating systems that are vastly more intelligent than any human. Systems with deceptive capabilities, with acquired subgoals and preferences that are difficult to discern. At a certain point it will become impossible for the research community to accurately assess the risks of these models.

Why does he believe that open weights strengthen safety?

That was an interesting write-up. I think one of the reasons there is so little resistance to this in Europe is that in the south people tend to assume that the government will do such a poor job that they will easily find a way around the rules, while in north people tend to believe the government has their back. That is a broad generalization, of course.

Cookies, anyone…?

He has an English BA degree. And he has taught high school. Yet, he presents himself as an expert in geopolitics and claims to be a professor. The guy is a fraud.

He is cosplaying as a professor.

Are they going to keep proposing this until it passes?

Are you setting it up so that you have some agents write code and others critique it/look for bugs? Playing them against each other sort of like GANs…

Value is determined when an asset is sold. At a price negotiated between buyer and seller. There is no such thing as unrealized profit or unrealized gain. How can you pass a law that is a logical contradiction? And can the public be expected to obey such laws?