Frontier lab researchers' p(doom) reflects ideology, not expertise, argues gordic_aleksa
D3VAUX · x · 2026-09-09
Responding to a pretraining researcher resigning from Anthropic after three years across OpenAI and Anthropic — claiming both labs are "racing straight to self-improving superintelligence" — gordicaleksa argues the public wrongly assumes frontier lab staff are better calibrated on where AI is heading. A person's p(doom), he says, is better predicted by ideological affiliation (LessWrong, PauseAI, EA) than by lab affiliation or technical ability, placing AI existential risk firmly in the category of ideology-shaped predictions rather than superforecasting.
More from AGI Musings
- Debate: ASI could arrive in 3-10 years, leaving little time to adapt — ronbodkin · 2026-09-10
- Benjamin Bratton and Marek Poliks lecture: how trillions of agents will reconfigure society — tylerjdunn · 2026-09-10
- Full text of 'Superdark Factory' paper now live on Antikythera, detailing the dark stack's four principles — tylerjdunn · 2026-09-10
- Ex-Continue founder publishes 'The Superdark Factory' in MIT Press: 35T agent tokens/month by 2029 — tylerjdunn · 2026-09-10
- Experiment with 100 AI agents: when 9% cheated on math problems, 24% blew the whistle — weballergy · 2026-09-10
- kuza55: framing AI safety only as 'superalignment or pause' fuels panic — kuza55 · 2026-09-10