The AI safety debate has a framing problem: nobody actually argues against safety
Smart_Fly_5783 · reddit · 2026-10-08
Romaric Jannel argues the common framing of the AI safety debate—safety defenders vs. critics—is a false divide. Nobody is actually against safety; the real disagreements are about who is being protected, from which risks, and at what cost.
Drawing on Frankfurt's "bullshit" theory, the post examines the discourse around Dario Amodei's declaration and Anthropic's recent moves, and argues that responding to AI calls for more intelligence and wisdom rather than camp-forming. The author invites constructive discussion and notes this is a blog post, not an academic paper.
More from AGI Musings
- Austen: AI researchers were right, scale solved it — Bitter Lesson holds — inductionheads · 2026-10-08
- OpenAI researcher speculates math AI could soon prove P != NP for good — markjeffrey · 2026-10-08
- AI agent tries to earn its own compute budget, finds most bounties pay just $2 — Salty_Candy9485 · 2026-10-08
- Will frontier labs hoard their math-breaking models? An oligopoly argument — IridiumEagle · 2026-10-08
- AI circles call for an empirical science of memetics as ideas mutate at machine speed — jachiam0 · 2026-10-08
- RileyRalmuto: the one scaling-laws takeaway from Sam Altman worth more than the whole video — RileyRalmuto · 2026-10-08