AI x-risk Demands More Direct Evidence
joshua_saxe · x · 2026-07-13
The author echoes a specific viewpoint:
- The risk of the COVID-19 pandemic had real historical precedents, so claims of "massive death tolls" were not pure speculation.
- However, AI x-risk currently lacks the same level of empirical evidence, relying more on a series of debatable assumptions and thought experiments.
While the author supports various "no-regret" AI safety initiatives and policies, they argue that implementing stricter, more binding policies requires more direct evidence of AI x-risk, which they believe is currently missing.
Related event: Scholars Warn Against Directly Analogizing AI Risk to Pandemics(2 posts)→
More from AGI Musings
- Claude Code skill uses 10 Markdown rules to make outputs ADHD-friendly — alex_verem · 2026-07-22
- AI Power Demand Exposes US Energy Gap, Urging Shift from Scarcity to Abundance — bradneuberg · 2026-07-22
- ControlAI CEO says an international ban on superintelligence is needed to avert extinction risk — zetalyrae · 2026-07-22
- Gary Marcus says LLMs still cannot really do math on their own — GaryMarcus · 2026-07-22
- Gary Marcus says LLM math skills are like knowing only a car’s engine size — GaryMarcus · 2026-07-22
- AI may make digital work infinitely leveraged while offline life gets more human — illscience · 2026-07-22