AI Impacts survey critics flag vague wording, tiny effective sample and MIRI ties
DrTechlash · x · 2026-09-15
The new AI Impacts survey on AI extinction risk draws renewed methodological criticism: respondents assign probabilities to a bundled "extinction or similarly permanent and severe disempowerment" outcome that media report as "extinction"; organizers themselves admit respondents aren't forecasting experts and framing effects are significant; the effective sample is 8% of 19,874 emails, with three question variants answered by subsets of only 744, 392 and 353 people; and the survey sits within Berkeley's MIRI, whose co-founder Eliezer Yudkowsky advocates shutting AI down, with co-author David Krueger assigning 75% p(doom).
Related event: Major AI researcher survey puts extinction risk near 18%, sparking debate(14 posts)→
More from AGI Musings
- Jensen Huang calls AI doomer 10% extinction prediction 'made up' and 'irresponsible' — firstadopter · 2026-09-15
- Common AI forecasts ignore algorithmic breakthroughs, argues one skeptical poster — shauseth · 2026-09-15
- Yacine: AI can't get much smarter — only faster from here — yacineMTB · 2026-09-15
- "Name One Thing AI Actually Made Better": Dev's Viral Skeptical Rant Beyond Coding — sebpaquet · 2026-09-15
- Analysis: Anthropic pacing alone buys one month; coordinated US slowdown cuts risk to 21% — soleio · 2026-09-15
- DeepMind biologist who built DNA synthesizers by hand debunks AI bio-risk fear mongering — ccerrato147 · 2026-09-15