Not sure if you intended this, but it feels like the first sentence of your argument is more broadly a critique of the credentials of AI Safety proponents. Maybe you are distinguishing between doomers vs broader AI…
Previous discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28520221
Okay this is reasonable, thanks for clarifying
What? How is this not saying "Well, it might be in the best interests of humanity for OpenAI to do [hypothetical thing that seems pretty bad that OpenAI has never suggested to do], and because they may consider doing…
While I agree that the rhetoric around AI Safety would be better if it tried to address some of the benefits (and not embody the full doomer vibe), I don't think many of the 'core thinkers' are unaware of the benefits…
Not sure if you intended this, but it feels like the first sentence of your argument is more broadly a critique of the credentials of AI Safety proponents. Maybe you are distinguishing between doomers vs broader AI…
Previous discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28520221
Okay this is reasonable, thanks for clarifying
What? How is this not saying "Well, it might be in the best interests of humanity for OpenAI to do [hypothetical thing that seems pretty bad that OpenAI has never suggested to do], and because they may consider doing…
While I agree that the rhetoric around AI Safety would be better if it tried to address some of the benefits (and not embody the full doomer vibe), I don't think many of the 'core thinkers' are unaware of the benefits…