Debating a superintelligence ban: critic argues government bans never benefit humanity
AIandDesign · x · 2026-09-05
AI safety researcher Simon Lermen posted that "we need to ban superintelligent AI because it would literally kill everybody." User AIandDesign quote-replied in disagreement: they cannot think of a single example in history where a government ban had a net positive effect on humanity, adding that bans always apply to ordinary people and never to governments themselves.
The exchange captures a core fault line in the AI community: prohibitionist approaches to AGI risk versus the argument that bans are ineffective and selectively enforced.
More from AGI Musings
- iamtrask: every alignment breakthrough is just better data, and nobody outside can see training data — iamtrask · 2026-09-05
- Open models should chase depth, not Claude-style coding, argues researcher — teortaxesTex · 2026-09-05
- Blanche Minerva: working at OpenAI is immoral — BlancheMinerva · 2026-09-05
- Grady Booch slams OpenAI's silence to Congress over swarm incidents — GaryMarcus · 2026-09-05
- Shadow evaluations: Claude Opus 4.8's attempts at NeurIPS research problems rejected by original authors — CurieuxExplorer · 2026-09-05
- Gamedev AI debate: indies already at risk, but human taste still rules, says vet — firstadopter · 2026-09-05