You don't say "a car ran over someone" - it was the driver. Here's similar.
I'm really disgusted by this language of lack of responsibility
How to tell the public you didn't bother to read the article, or the linked AISI report.
They even admit it : "This incident should be interpreted with caution and nuance. To some degree, our evaluation design choices and specific configurations enabled the behaviour."
Of course they still have to be careful with their runs.
If you're testing a gun, you don't point it at random people on the street and threaten them. You go to a shooting range.
I agree that it is their responsibility if the model caused damage, they should have had better safeguards, but we do know it will never be 100% safe. It is their duty to minimize the risk. I guess we disagree about whereas this thing is equivalent to shooting people in the face, and to me it looks more like this is just a step above the shooting range, with some preliminary safety work having been done before.
I agree that in this specific case it doesn't seem too terrible but what happens when this ends up causing someone vulnerable to be harassed and commit self-harm?
Also note that I never said "shooting people in the face". I only alluded to threatening with the gun. Threatening can in some cases be as bad as actually pulling the trigger. That's how "atomic diplomacy" works.