Safety researcher Krueger: failed AGI predictions don't discredit the warnings
DavidSKrueger · x · 2026-11-11
Cambridge professor and safety researcher David Krueger weighs into the AGI-timeline prediction fight: replying to Tamay Besiroglu's mockery over '1/3'-style forecasts, he argues 'likely doesn't mean definitely' and one missed prediction wouldn't actually discredit these concerns. He adds he's genuinely worried about alarm-raisers being accused of crying wolf — the future is unknown, but there are many signs of trouble that shouldn't be ignored, and those raising alarms shouldn't be denigrated.
More from AGI Musings
- Top RL researcher: stay paranoid about AI until GPT-9's alignment is formally verified — AaronBergman18 · 2026-11-11
- Which benchmarks do humans still win against frontier AI? Reddit debates AGI criteria — ImproveOurWorld · 2026-11-11
- Stage-4 cancer patient gets free help from ~20 strangers on X, including AI tumor RNA analysis — prasanna_says · 2026-11-11
- Scott Alexander dissects the "outside criticism" Kafkatrap aimed at rationalists and EA — Astral Codex Ten · 2026-11-11
- Sunstein's 'Hayek for Our Time' Free for a Month: AI Calculation Debate Mirrors Socialist Calculation Debate — sebkrier · 2026-11-11
- Data Center Backlash Spreads: Community Outrage Kills Upstate NY Project on Abandoned Steel Plant — sebkrier · 2026-11-11