davidmanheim: prosaic biorisks justify billions in biodefense, but won't stop ASI
davidmanheim · x · 2026-09-15
Replying to ramez, davidmanheim concedes that 'prosaic' biorisks and AI×bio risks more than justify spending billions on biodefense — but argues this doesn't address ASI. His core claim: don't plan to outsmart something 100x smarter and 100x faster by being clever. He doubles down on defending the Rationalist community's tradition of saying what you actually think rather than what sells well.
Related event: Policy budgets only cover survivable disasters, leaving ASI risk out(2 posts)→
More from AGI Musings
- Andreessen slams AI decelerationists: their regulation will rob the country of prosperity — beffjezos · 2026-09-15
- Researchers debate AI brainstorming: no amazing ideas, just useful bad suggestions — lvwerra · 2026-09-15
- Blogger argues AI doom hype rests on anthropomorphic projections, not real risk — Merzmensch · 2026-09-15
- AI safety circle debates whether extinction framing is a doomed policy strategy — davidmanheim · 2026-09-15
- From Turing to Hinton: a 70-year lineage of AI risk warnings — gleech · 2026-09-15
- RLHF paper never described instruct model training; insiders reflect on invalidated takes — jd_pressman · 2026-09-15