A big-tent or small-tent AI safety movement?
In recent weeks, two narratives about AI safety have emerged: either AI existential risk is real and imminent, or AI leaders’ and whistleblowers’ claims to that effect are insincere — a “psyop” or hype or a twisted form of regulatory capture.
Proof1 independent outlet
Key points
- Few have considered the third possibility that x-risk warnings are sincere but simply wrong and counterproductive to AI safety.
- It is true that we systematically underinvest in resilience against catastrophic and systemic risks
- Let’s start by steelmanning a subset of AI safety and Effective Altruist (EA) arguments.
- To be clear, the inadequacy of pandemic preparedness is by no means a uniquely Effective Altruist insight, let alone AI safety.
Sources (1)
- [1]A big-tent or small-tent AI safety movement?AI Snake Oil · Oct 1, 04:34 PM
In recent weeks, two narratives about AI safety have emerged: either AI existential risk is real and imminent, or AI leaders’ and whistleblowers’ claims to that effect are insincere — a “psyop” or hype or a twisted form of regulatory capture.
Few have considered the third possibility that x-risk warnings are sincere but simply wrong and counterproductive to AI safety.
Extractive summary: sentences quoted from the sources.
