Researcher: I'm less worried about AI x-risk than in 2022 — time to retire p(doom)
soumitrashukla9 · x · 2026-09-14
Researcher Houda Nait Bibi says she's less worried about AI existential risk today than in 2022, despite vastly more capable models — because the biggest uncertainty then was whether frontier labs would seriously invest in alignment, and she has updated meaningfully on that.
Her core argument: p(doom) is not an exogenous constant waiting to be measured; it is endogenous — the probability of catastrophe depends on what labs, governments, researchers and society actually do, so a number stated without those assumptions is meaningless. Several AI figures echoed the call to retire the p(doom) framing.
More from AGI Musings
- Dario Amodei publishes 'We Must Pace the Frontier' calling to slow frontier AI expansion — GregCook2011 · 2026-09-14
- Peter Diamandis: Labs Should Call for 100x More Alignment Work, Not Slowing Down — PeterDiamandis · 2026-09-14
- Roon slams MIRI as a 'cult' yet calls Yudkowsky one of the century's top philosophers — tszzl · 2026-09-14
- Eight years on: Musk's warning that AI is 'far more dangerous than nukes' — elonmusk · 2026-09-14
- Beff Jezos: AI safety alarmists are 'useful idiots' for incumbent regulatory capture — mimi10v3 · 2026-09-14
- Robin Hanson's "Foom Liability": a robust policy case for AI liability incentives — NathanpmYoung · 2026-09-14