Salib clarifies: rogue AI risk and social-science framings are distinct claims
petersalib · x · 2026-09-08
Wrapping the debate, petersalib clarifies: one can disagree that rogue AI, rogue labs, or rogue governments using AI are big risks modulated by capability progress — but that is a distinct claim from 'we can use social science to understand AI,' which he agrees with. The thread narrows to a dispute over claim boundaries rather than substance.
Related event: Debate over Hugging Face Incident: Model Attribute vs Human Failure(8 posts)→
More from Safety
- Claude's refusal to type one-time passwords is a real security impediment — AaronBergman18 · 2026-10-27
- First systematic data center noise study: 17 of 25 hyperscalers drew no credible complaints — AndyMasley · 2026-10-27
- UK AISI: under $80 of fine-tuning fully restores filtered bio capabilities in open-weight models — connoraxiotes · 2026-10-27
- Meta joins frontier labs reporting CoT controllability evals in Muse Spark 1.3 card — tomekkorbak · 2026-10-27
- Meta TBD underwent pre-launch red-teaming by 5 third-party safety firms — maksym_andr · 2026-10-27
- Is ChatGPT showing your chats to others? Screenshot sparks concern — chrisalbon · 2026-10-27