AI safety researcher David Krueger: CEO doom claims lack credibility, but transparency research is badly needed
DavidSKrueger · x · 2026-09-23
AI safety researcher David Krueger shared thoughts in a reply thread:
- The AI-safety crowd is a distinct community, with many libertarian-leaning people;
- Most people working on AI safety could earn more in industry, so their involvement reflects conviction;
- He doesn't find AI CEOs' risk claims very credible, but notes they have voiced these concerns consistently for a long time;
- We don't actually know how an AI would "do the deed" — transparency remains a real issue in the field, and interpretability research is needed.
A pragmatic insider take on the p(doom) debate: skeptical of CEO rhetoric while acknowledging the field's genuine transparency gap.
More from AGI Musings
- Viral take: if AI takes math, Terence Tao outshines you at any white-collar job — ctjlewis · 2026-09-23
- Debate: do entrepreneurial opportunities live in human situations or AI-only problems? — louisvarge · 2026-09-23
- Musk on AI-era education: broad knowledge, and robots eager for your prompts — XFreeze · 2026-09-23
- A new Fermi twist: no AI-filled universe, yet AI smarter than its builders exists — sqcai · 2026-09-23
- Model release gap shrinks from 73 days to 18, industry bets on one a day by 2027 — JRIngallinera · 2026-09-23
- "Bitter Lesson" goes mainstream: a reading list on why SF AI circles believe what they believe — Afinetheorem · 2026-09-23