Banning AGI attempts isn't regulatory capture — it directly threatens the industry's RSI endgame
GarrisonLovely · x · 2026-09-09
Responding to Heidy Khlaaf's claim that X-risk advocacy is a regulatory capture mechanism, Garrison Lovely argues the obvious anti-x-risk measure is criminalizing attempts to build AGI or precursors like recursive self-improvement — the industry's best path out of burning tens of billions per year. He also analyzes the Bernie/Casar proposal banning superintelligence development and pausing frontier AI until safety regulation exists, arguing an empowered safety regulator would never approve AGI, so the proposal is clearly against industry interests despite being less radical.
More from AGI Musings
- If human insight remains an ineliminable complement, it will limit AI's gains in science — erikphoel · 2026-09-10
- AI 'Dark Forest' Could Slow Knowledge Accumulation, Economic Model Suggests — erikphoel · 2026-09-10
- Guillaume Verdon: the real danger is self-aggrandizing AI researchers, not AI — beffjezos · 2026-09-10
- Verdon mocks AI scientists upset the world won't stop their 10%-doom AI — beffjezos · 2026-09-10
- One model that codes, uses computers and controls robots: a real step toward AGI — k7agar · 2026-09-10
- LLM-Modulo Solves Navier-Stokes? Math May Not Be Unique to Intelligence — rao2z · 2026-09-10