13 Comments
тна Return to thread

Why do you assume the solutions must be centralized? I didn't say that and didn't mean to imply it.

Expand full comment

It's implicit in your use of the collectivist plural pronoun.

> The best path forward, both for humanity and for the political battle, is to acknowledge the risks, help to identify them, and come up with a plan to solve them. How do **we** develop safe AI? And how do **we** develop AI safely?

I'm not sure who you intended by "we", for all I know you have a tapeworm, but in practice it would always boil down to at best several "elite solutionists" and more likely a bunch of government bureaucrats.

Expand full comment

I see. That's not how I meant it. I just meant that in a generic sense, as in: how can safe AI be developed? How can AI be developed safely? I didn't intend, and don't expect, that it will be done in centralized fashion.

Expand full comment

Ok, that's the collectivist passive voice, which is just as bad.

> I didn't intend, and don't expect, that it will be done in centralized fashion.

Well, all the AI safetyists believe in a centralized approach. Eliezer has even suggested nukes be used against countries that refuse to take action against "rogue developers".

Expand full comment