Why define AI risk as "billions in damages" instead of "lights out for humanity"?
herbiebradley · x · 2026-08-29
In a discussion about AI biosecurity risks, Herbie Bradley questions setting the bar at "lights out for humanity". He argues that based on the arguments used, defining the risk as causing "billions in damages" is more justifiable and easier to organize around.
More from AGI Musings
- Game studios can sell privately hosted realistic games to AI labs as training environments — dejavucoder · 2026-10-15
- Retellings Use New Perspectives to Replace Romance with Therapeutic Diagnosis — eigenrobot · 2026-10-15
- CHI Reviewer: AI Slop Is Real, but Unusually Rigorous Papers Still Getting Through — IanArawjo · 2026-10-15
- ASML Sells Zero Lithography Machines into Europe as US Hosts 75%+ of AI Compute — NinaDSchick · 2026-10-15
- Into the Unknown: CMU benchmark finds 114 of 135 AI-written research papers fail integrity checks — arankomatsuzaki · 2026-10-15
- LLMs-as-Media Erode Producer Power; Author Ties It to Securities Reform — curious_vii · 2026-10-15