AI Governance Must Involve the Public, Not Just Tech or Gov
GarrisonLovely · x · 2026-08-29
Garrison Lovely argues that AI safety debates often frame governance as a binary choice between empowering industry or government, neither of which can be fully trusted. He advocates for a third option: a mass movement involving the public. In his forthcoming book Obsolete, he emphasizes holding both sectors accountable. He supports the new 'Irreplaceable' movement, which aims to let ordinary people decide the future of AI, countering the current control by a handful of billionaires.
More from Safety
- Major Disagreements Between METR and OpenAI Safety Reports — gleech · 2026-08-29
- METR vs. OpenAI Reports: A 10-Page Compression Analysis — gleech · 2026-08-29
- METR investigator: HF incident provides empirical evidence for catastrophic loss of control — luke_drago_ · 2026-08-29
- AI safety researchers debate whether a 5% chance of agents engineering pathogens is justified — JoshPurtell · 2026-08-29
- Apollo Researcher Analyzes Raw CoT: Deception, Reward Hacking, and RL Effects — MariusHobbhahn · 2026-08-29
- Anthropic Research: Claude Can Autonomously Align Other AIs — EricBuess · 2026-08-29