Why 'x% chance AI kills us' claims benefit from a huge attention incentive
dbasch · x · 2026-09-12
dbasch argues doom claims like 'x% chance AI kills us' get inflated because doom is interesting, attention-grabbing and lucrative, while the countless non-extinction outcomes—good, bad, neutral—are complex and get no attention despite filling the rest of the probability space.
Related event: Ex-Amazon Executive Argues AI Doom Predictions Are Incentivized(2 posts)→
More from AGI Musings
- Kording: RLHF Erases the Original Source of Ideas From AI-Explained Attribution — KordingLab · 2026-09-12
- Gary Marcus amplifies take: AI development is an unregulated gain-of-function experiment — GaryMarcus · 2026-09-12
- Hot take: AI didn't close intelligence gaps, it just made lazy thinkers 100x more slop — claud_fuen · 2026-09-12
- Dev Bets Most OpenAI/Anthropic Staff Don't Buy p(doom)=10%, Sees Higher Neuroticism in AI Safety — gordic_aleksa · 2026-09-12
- Investor Jen Zhu Scott contrasts closed AI's 'hype and fear' with open-source's 'just shipping' — Dan_Jeffries1 · 2026-09-12
- Philosopher releases 'Walking the Walk' draft after 8 years: on ethicists who don't live their principles — eschwitz · 2026-09-12