No, but what are you implying? That they should never use the model because it cannot be proven 100% safe?

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.

Maybe they shouldn't run tests that are not safe and threaten the public?

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.