Seth on the title flap: it reflects our credences, and the case against CF goes beyond unproven
anilkseth · x · 2026-10-21
Anil Seth addressed the title controversy directly: the title is fair since it reflects the team's credences (they approved it, though didn't choose it). He agrees claims about X being established vs true/false must be kept apart, but insists his argument is that there are good reasons CF is likely false beyond mere lack of establishment. "Lots to talk about when we next meet."
Related event: Chalmers and Seth Debate Computational Functionalism on Consciousness(2 posts)→
More from AGI Musings
- Brynjolfsson, Ajay and Korinek lay out nine grand challenges for economists in the AI era — soumitrashukla9 · 2026-10-23
- AI job-impact paper reviewed by Acemoglu, Autor — measures pressure, not outcomes — soumitrashukla9 · 2026-10-23
- Brynjolfsson engages the 'Hayek vs Stanford school' debate on whether institutions can adapt to transformative AI — erikbryn · 2026-10-23
- 3 Quarks Daily's thoughtful AI writing policy: different rules for different content — lmoroney · 2026-10-23
- Dario's predictions on track: Mythos 'security tsunami' warning and 6-12 month China catch-up window — rickasaurus · 2026-10-23
- php2shell zero-day sparks AI cybersecurity debate as Anthropic uses Claude to harden 25 OSS codebases — connoraxiotes · 2026-10-23