AI timelines debates go nowhere because everyone secretly defines superintelligence differently
sebkrier · x · 2026-11-09
manaltdan argues that while AI timelines discussions are exhausting, timelines underpin disagreements on everything from policy to economics to alignment. Much of the talking-past-each-other happens because participants deliberately preserve ambiguity in their beliefs — both sides argue vigorously about 'superintelligence' while holding drastically different internal conceptions of it. Stating exact timelines and definitions up front would save a lot of breath.
More from AGI Musings
- Owain Evans: now is the right time to switch into AI safety work — OwainEvans_UK · 2026-11-09
- Henry Farrell: the "machine gods" metaphor shrinks AI policy debate and should be resisted — sebkrier · 2026-11-09
- Thomas Dietterich: map what LLMs can assess reliably, design UX for the rest — JessicaHullman · 2026-11-09
- Bitter lesson redux: methods that generalize beat compute brute force, Sutton weighs in — ryanallred · 2026-11-09
- Built a telco anomaly detection system in 3 days: 'the code doesn't matter, the cookbook is the product' — l4rz · 2026-11-09
- Owain Evans flags Daniel Kokotajlo's new LessWrong shortform as worth reading — OwainEvans_UK · 2026-11-09