AI policy should borrow crisis engineering and risk-management playbooks
joshua_saxe · x · 2026-08-04
A reply argues that AI policy should learn from the long history of risk management in fields like pharmaceuticals and other high-stakes domains.
- It says those examples can inform complexity theory and how to design policy after legislation finally happens.
- The author recommends the book Crisis Engineering as something more policy people should read.
- The post ends with a joking Lovecraft reference, but the core point is that AI governance needs practical implementation thinking, not just abstract regulation talk.
More from AGI Musings
- An engineer worries heavy LLM use may be becoming psychologically addictive — Odd_Crab1224 · 2026-08-04
- AI may make credentials matter more, but outliers still beat status — soumitrashukla9 · 2026-08-04
- Seldon AI cofounder says robotics will hit jobs slower than model-driven automation — luke_drago_ · 2026-08-04
- GDP may track prosperity today, but not across radically different AI futures — jekbradbury · 2026-08-04
- Surpassing Apple Again: Does Having the SOTA Model Really Matter Most for Google? — ErmingSoHard · 2026-08-04
- Jagged AI progress makes a sudden AGI arrival seem less likely — aparnadhinak · 2026-08-04