That seems potentially reasonable for organizations who have have a unlimited profit motive, but I'm not sure how you would insist that is the case for OpenAI. They are governed by their nonprofit body, their mission is to ensure AGI benefits all of humanity, and they've said (Sam Altman) that if there is a choice between safety and profits, profits take a back seat and wait. Is the trick that we just insist that they are actually only caring about the money, and they actually have no genuine concern/effort regarding safety?

And if none of the frontier labs are as you say, it doesn't seem like we're negotiating for the best future by restricting labs from stumbling into these vulnerabilities full-stop. The vulnerabilities don't go away unless we find and fix them.

That's okay. It isn't necessarily incompatible with being well intentioned regarding the disclosure of vulnerabilities.

On the whole I think you could describe the local big box grocery store as just wanting to make money yet as a direct result of that they are well intentioned from my perspective with regard to the food they sell being edible.