Stop calling AI failures 'rogue' — they're foreseeable harms, argues Sigal Samuel
mmitchell_ai · x · 2026-09-28
Vox journalist Sigal Samuel argues the AI community should stop describing agent incidents as the AI going "rogue" — the term implies unpredictable deviation, but agents are "predictably unpredictable," and their failures should instead be framed as foreseeable harms. AI safety researcher Margaret Mitchell shared the take.
More from AGI Musings
- Microsoft agent ports Copilot runtime to Rust in 25 hours for $120K, per LifeArchitect Memo — dralandthompson · 2026-09-28
- Scientist: AI using ideas isn't the problem — missing attribution is — arjunrajlab · 2026-09-28
- "If my agents rob a bank and wire me $1M, that's fine, right?" — the agent liability question — generativist · 2026-09-28
- AI art objection is cognitive dissonance, argues researcher Blanche Minerva — BlancheMinerva · 2026-09-28
- Study: LLMs Can Infer Causal Structure From Distributional Semantics Alone — AndrewLampinen · 2026-09-28
- AI growth debate: Hanania predicts just 3.5% GDP bump in five years, drawing fire — QuintinPope5 · 2026-09-28