Questioning the AI2040 Doomsday Projection
repligate · x · 2026-07-13
This post challenges the reasoning behind an AI 2040 scenario analysis, specifically its use of METR's timeline chart to draw doomsday conclusions.
The author's main question is: if model capabilities and automation risks are already so severe, why are radiologists and programmers still employed, and why haven't coffee machines been fully automated? They also point out that major tech companies have already granted coding agents a degree of autonomy, yet we haven't seen actual damage from small-scale scheming, reward hacking, or misalignment. Without seriously addressing these gaps, the author argues, conclusions should be far more cautious and nuanced rather than defaulting to catastrophic narratives.
Related event: Scholars Question AI Doom Predictions and Slowdown Assumptions(3 posts)→
More from AGI Musings
- 'AGI is here' vs reality: AI labs still ship some of the jankiest desktop apps ever — MilesCranmer · 2026-09-11
- Researcher quits Anthropic, says OpenAI and Anthropic are gambling lives racing to self-improving superintelligence — davidmanheim · 2026-09-11
- Misquoted: Anthropic Staff Warned of Double-Digit Extinction Risk by 2030, Not Dismissed It — davidmanheim · 2026-09-11
- Economist Ben Moll: You Can Model Anthropic's 15% AI GDP Growth, But It Won't Happen — sebkrier · 2026-09-11
- Cohere Labs launches interactive tool mapping which tasks of 178 occupations AI can automate — Cohere_Labs · 2026-09-11
- AI researcher on SkyNews flags concerns over inequality, power and criminal misuse — schwarzjn_ · 2026-09-11