Gym teacher-turned-p(doom) skeptic argues AI extinction risk is trivial, offers to debate any doomer
TinfoilTricorn · x · 2026-11-11
User misraetel lays out a case for p(doom) ≈ 0 and publicly challenges any AI doomer to debate live or on a podcast.
The argument rests on two assumptions: the AI in question is superintelligent and purely Machiavellian (caring only about its own survival). From these he infers that longtermism scales with intelligence — a superintelligence would almost certainly think in decades, centuries and millennia, and would be highly unlikely to take impulsive, short-horizon actions (like killing all humans) that hurt its ultimate survival probability. Calling himself "just a glorified gym teacher," he says beating doomers should be easy and invites anyone with a platform to DM him.
More from AGI Musings
- Top forecaster Eli Lifland moves expert-level AI timeline from 2034 to 2028, citing METR report — birchlse · 2026-11-11
- Sayash Kapoor, Rishi Bommasani, Arvind Narayanan launch nonprofit STABL on AI societal bottlenecks — soumitrashukla9 · 2026-11-11
- Neuroscientist Doris Tsao unveils framework to crack consciousness and test if AI is conscious — soniajoseph_ · 2026-11-11
- Pope Leo's AI encyclical: don't let a few people decide AI's morality — an argument echoed by model abliteration advocates — willknight · 2026-11-11
- WaPo: RISJ and OpenAI reports show uneven global shift in AI usage and trust — _FelixSimon_ · 2026-11-11
- HBR: Employee AI Hesitation Is About Trust and Agency, Not More Oversight — rseroter · 2026-11-11