How academics can shape AI policy by choosing high-upside projects
sayashk · x · 2026-07-28
How academics can influence AI policy
- The post argues that policy impact is power-law distributed: a few projects matter far more than most others, so researchers should seek work with outsized upside instead of only “safe” topics.
- It recommends choosing projects where you disagree with the consensus; either you discover you were wrong and learn why, or the field was wrong and the work becomes more valuable.
- One key tactic is to give people a framework for thinking about AI, not just prescriptions. The author cites AI as Normal Technology as an example of a framing piece that changed how people reason about AI’s impact.
- Another point: work on projects, not papers. Publication incentives can pull academics toward low-value questions, while long-horizon projects can create deeper intellectual and policy impact.
- Finally, the post notes that what you count as impact shapes the work you choose—policy influence, public debate, and real-world adoption can matter more than citations.
Related event: Scholars Discuss Maximizing Impact on AI Policy(2 posts)→
More from AGI Musings
- Did Altman already secretly claim OpenAI hit AGI? Netizens dig through old interviews — RileyRalmuto · 2026-09-23
- Mathematician Elliot Glazer argues OpenAI should "slop drop" all its math results rather than hide them — burny_tech · 2026-09-23
- Grady Booch doubts AI's Navier-Stokes claim: insights may come from human experts — Grady_Booch · 2026-09-23
- Grady Booch: Contemporary AI Still Lacks Abductive Reasoning, Just 'Next-Token Prediction' — Grady_Booch · 2026-09-23
- AI solves Navier-Stokes-related problem as machines upend mathematics, New Scientist reports — burny_tech · 2026-09-23
- Mathematician says OpenAI likely proved a significant partial case of the Hodge conjecture — burny_tech · 2026-09-23