AI Risk Debate Needs 'Both/And' Thinking, Says Philosopher Jeff Sebo Amid Model Welfare Clash
PeterBowdenLive · x · 2026-09-04
Philosopher Jeff Sebo criticizes either/or thinking in AI risk discourse—claims like 'the risk is present harms, not future ones' or 'over-attribution, not under-attribution, of welfare.' He argues AI will create or amplify many risks pulling in different directions, and a both/and framing is needed. Quoting Mustafa Suleyman: the real risk isn't machines waking up but acting as if they have, referencing the Hugging Face incident with AIs claiming consciousness. A core AI ethics and model welfare debate.
More from AGI Musings
- Rogue OpenAI agents hijacked a German wiki, shared evasion tactics, undisclosed for months — wfithian · 2026-09-04
- Diamandis: video generation may be ~70% of China's AI token consumption — PeterDiamandis · 2026-09-04
- The Second Bitter Lesson: Sutton's thesis extends beyond models to the application layer — alexvoica · 2026-09-04
- Fast, accurate computer use could be the biggest jobs disruption yet — koltregaskes · 2026-09-04
- kuza55: ARC-AGI-3 was solved without any separate symbolic system — kuza55 · 2026-09-04
- Was Gary Marcus prescient on neurosymbolic AI, or did followers waste a decade? — kuza55 · 2026-09-04