Evo-bio rebuttal: market forces select AI for usefulness, not against safety
robleclerc · x · 2026-09-28
Responding to the paper "Natural Selection Favors AIs over Humans" — which argues unconstrained, competitive AIs beat safe ones and reap more funding and compute — the author pushes back from an evolutionary biology angle: selection favors differential reproductive success, which for AI means models maximizing human utility while minimizing danger.
Training sets, evals, and alignment strategies will evolve toward those outcomes. Problematic or misaligned AIs need extra alignment training, testing, and guardrails, which slow time-to-market and cap customer value — imposing a fitness penalty on the model family, the lab, and its researchers.
More from AGI Musings
- RL's limit: without a scoring function there's no signal, and 'learning' is inflated jargon — gerardsans · 2026-09-28
- Mark Pincus: If starting over, he'd rebuild social media with AI agents — PeterDiamandis · 2026-09-28
- VC admits he was wrong on 'token apocalypse' as Opus 5.5 points to too-cheap-to-meter AI — StewartalsopIII · 2026-09-28
- Matt Turck: AI researchers don't buy doom or acceleration, outsiders do — mattturck · 2026-09-28
- Philosopher Jeff Sebo Pushes Back on Pinker's Sorites Argument Against Superintelligence — burny_tech · 2026-09-28
- Prediction: In ~6 months AI animations will beat all but the best hand-made work — round · 2026-09-28