Caught between two extremes: 'we're all dying' doomers vs 'AI risk is a psyop' deniers
gabriel1 · x · 2026-09-11
gabriel1 dislikes both extreme camps in the AI safety debate — "we are 100% dying, pause AI now at any cost" vs "why would AI become bad, this is a psyop." He's optimistic but sees real changes worth discussing, and laments that extreme narratives crowd out reasonable regulation debates outside SF.
More from AGI Musings
- e/acc's beffjezos mocks Anthropic over "regulatory monopoly" safety satire — beffjezos · 2026-09-11
- OpenAI confirms progress on second Millennium Prize problem, sparking RSI debate — AndyMasley · 2026-09-11
- OpenAI Internal Model Ran 10K Agents for 88 Hours, Claims Partial Navier-Stokes Proof — eyishazyer · 2026-09-11
- Paras Chopra: Build AI as exoskeletons for humans, not total replacements — CatAstro_Piyush · 2026-09-11
- Ex-OpenAI/Anthropic researcher resigns, says labs are gambling lives racing to self-improving superintelligence — csuwildcat · 2026-09-11
- Richard Ngo: How AI safety got captured by OpenAI and later Anthropic — RichardMCNgo · 2026-09-11