AI skeptic: trust controlled experiments, not AI labs' self-reporting
gerardsans · x · 2026-10-15
In an AI bubble debate, @gerardsans argues the evidence base should be years of controlled-experiment literature rather than self-reported claims from AI labs and invested parties, adding "the government will not protect the public or private investors."
- He argues the lack of drama so far is why many naive investors doing no due diligence will be left holding the bag: "You can't sustain an industry with just storytelling."
More from AGI Musings
- Scholar's long post on Anthropic's societal-challenges push: earnest aims, ecosystem worries — sethlazar · 2026-10-15
- AI Auditing Pioneer Deb Raji Joins Stanford HAI to Tackle AI Harm Accountability — StanfordHAI · 2026-10-15
- Will the frontier-lab and closed-vs-open capability gap widen in six months? — panickssery · 2026-10-15
- Beyond automation: Stanford economists sketch a white-box, human-AI collaboration research agenda — AI Snake Oil · 2026-10-15
- Grady Booch: Removing bottlenecks just yields more code, not more value — Grady_Booch · 2026-10-15
- Acemoglu's seven questions on AI meet Gans's replies, and economists say both dodge market failure — joshgans · 2026-10-15