AI safety discourse ignores 60%+ of potential harms, critic says — 90% is technical safety
amplifiedamp · x · 2026-11-13
A widely shared take argues that AI safety conversations fail to address 60%+ of potential AI harms because they're less legible to people in AI. Roughly 90% of the discourse is technical safety, with only 10% touching social-science and economic risks — and then the conversation stops.
More from AGI Musings
- AI wealth's 'third wave' of philanthropy: ~$37B a year, best spent catalyzing markets — RishiBommasani · 2026-11-13
- Jensen Huang shouldn't have resigned — he should have fought for AGI — jtoy · 2026-11-13
- Open source faces a blunt choice as zero-days surge 10x: accept AI patches or risk attacks — Paimaamu · 2026-11-13
- AI Shopping Agents Could Break the 20-25% Commission Marketplace Model — julianweisser · 2026-11-13
- a16z: 30M coders drive most AI revenue, 1.5B knowledge workers still untapped — robleclerc · 2026-11-13
- Could an AI agent go viral? A thought experiment on worms spreading through 1,000-agent networks — Both-Shape-3953 · 2026-11-13