tszzl: 'responsible AI' shouldn't mean keeping guilds in charge
tszzl · x · 2026-09-22
Replying to Ethan Mollick, tszzl argues that being 'responsible' should mean avoiding catastrophic harms, not partnering with various guilds to keep them in charge — a direct critique of protectionist tendencies in AI governance.
More from AGI Musings
- Hugging Face incident row: Andrew Ng calls AI fear a PR-driven setback, critics push back — aran_nayebi · 2026-09-22
- Google researcher: AI adoption stalls on certainty expectations — output error bounds instead — docmilanfar · 2026-09-22
- Aviation-Style Black Boxes for AI: Building Incident Reporting Systems — ProfChesterman · 2026-09-22
- AI safety scholar: safety has moved from niche to mainstream, with hype and conflicts of interest — ProfChesterman · 2026-09-22
- "Alignment is a diff you can ship": Andrew Ng's most contrarian line on model alignment — ccerrato147 · 2026-09-22
- Andrew Ng says the 2023 AI doom wave was PR: publicity, fundraising and rules to shut out rivals — ccerrato147 · 2026-09-22