Miles Brundage says AI safety incidents are broadly predictable even if details aren’t
Miles_Brundage · x · 2026-07-23
Miles Brundage argues that even if the details of AI safety incidents are hard to predict, their broad shape is often predictable.
He says this is one reason he is bothered by the idea of “iterative deployment” in this context: the warning signs are not unknown, and failures are not excusable just because the exact incident was hard to forecast. The post is essentially a critique of complacency around AI safety planning.
Related event: Scholars Criticize Frontier AI Labs' Safety Culture and Marketing(10 posts)→
More from AGI Musings
- AI + science debate: the sweet spot is what happens to science, not scientists — soumitrashukla9 · 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
- VC compares AI doom rhetoric to pandemic-era fear messaging — StewartalsopIII · 2026-09-11
- Anthropic Insiders: Not Everyone at the Lab Believes in High p(doom) — anpaure · 2026-09-11