Debate: Does longtermism let AI doomers ignore probability entirely?
gabriel_weil · x · 2026-09-20
A spat over the logical foundations of AI existential-risk advocacy. The quoted tweet argues that longtermism is what excuses the enormous emphasis on AI x-risk regardless of its likelihood or near-term benefits—letting doomers claim the magnitude of doom alone justifies prevention at any probability. The original poster pushes back, saying very few relevant people actually argue anything like that.
Related event: Debate Erupts Over Longtermism's Grip on AI Safety Agenda(3 posts)→
More from AGI Musings
- EA Community Erupts Over Philosopher's Argument That Insect Lives May Be Net Negative — teortaxesTex · 2026-09-20
- Beff Jezos: AI cannot be controlled by a Berkeley ideological cluster or committee — beffjezos · 2026-09-20
- Eric Schmidt: UIs will largely disappear as agents make 90% of web traffic non-human — rohanpaul_ai · 2026-09-20
- AI researcher argues humans' decorrelated skills beat AI at market-driven role matching — QuintinPope5 · 2026-09-20
- Luiza Jarovsky: AI won't kill all humans by 2030, but could destabilize global systems — AlexTensor · 2026-09-20
- Investor: personal AI assistants have arrived, generative streaming takes off in 2027 — annbordetsky · 2026-09-20