AI doom is plausible, which is why the Pause crew are controlled opposition, argues researcher
georgejrjrjr · x · 2026-09-03
The author makes a pointed claim: precisely because AI doom scenarios are quite plausible, the Pause movement should be regarded as "basiliskian controlled opposition" — nominally pro-safety actors who are kept away from all substantive power and influence. The post is a short polemic rather than an argument, but it captures the deep distrust some in the AI community hold toward pause advocates.
More from AGI Musings
- Skin cancer detection stalls on trust: users won't upload body photos to health AI — MaziyarPanahi · 2026-09-03
- LatamGPT lead to keynote Tapia 2026 on building Latin America's first foundation model — OmarUFlorez · 2026-09-03
- Andy Masley: The data center backlash won't help AI safety — it may backfire — AndyMasley · 2026-09-03
- Mechanism Design Could Shape AI Behavior Without Understanding Neural Nets, Argues Economist — morqon · 2026-09-03
- Ben Todd: an incident can be both a security and an alignment failure at once — ben_j_todd · 2026-09-03
- DC insiders urged us to tone down rogue AI warnings, says AI safety researcher — jeremiecharris · 2026-09-03