Embroidery CEO: AI safety debate skips from today's cyber failures straight to 'machine god'
basedjensen · x · 2026-09-26
Embroidery CEO Zack Korman argues the AI safety debate habitually leaps from today's concrete cybersecurity failures to far-off "machine god" scenarios without proving we can secure the stages in between.
Key points:
- Dismissing arguments with "imagine the model's even smarter" is like a four-year-old saying "and then the god lasers out of its eyes" — it stalls the discussion.
- Only if a machine god that can commit any egregious act on intellect alone actually arrives would such doomsday reasoning matter; before that, risk advocates should prove they're good at the security fundamentals.
- "We're only talking about cybersecurity for the purposes of talking about how it doesn't work when we achieve machine god. All of the points prior to machine god will work."
A notable contrarian take pushing the conversation back toward verifiable security practice instead of abstract doomsday framing.
Related event: AI Doomers and Safety Skeptics Clash Again on X(3 posts)→
More from AGI Musings
- Paper maps road to recursive self-improvement: software leads, robotics and healthcare lag — rohanpaul_ai · 2026-09-26
- Roadmap paper maps 5-level path to recursive self-improvement: full RSI not here yet — rohanpaul_ai · 2026-09-26
- Ex-OpenAI Policy Head Miles Brundage Questions White House Double Standard Toward AI Labs — Miles_Brundage · 2026-09-26
- After 10 hours of meetings and 7 iterations, researcher argues 90% AI-detector score is misleading — kfountou · 2026-09-26
- ARC Prize once insisted plain deep learning couldn't crack ARC — then o3 happened — teortaxesTex · 2026-09-26
- Crowbar analogy reignites debate over who's liable when AI agents break rules — GaryMarcus · 2026-09-26