It's okay to disagree with us, but please don't ignore the women who have been publicly concerned about AI x-risk, like @jesswhittles, @katjaGrace and myself.
@ajeya_cotra @jesswhittles @KatjaGrace Could you provide a list of concerns and scenarios described in concrete and specific terms? Is there a research paper to cite?
@MikeWirth525 @jesswhittles @KatjaGrace https://arxiv.org/pdf/2306.120... by @DanHendrycks provides an overview of multiple risks, https://arxiv.org/pdf/2209.006... by @RichardMCNgo is a dive into the specific concern that powerful AI systems might be motivated to competently pursue goals their creators didn't intend.
@ajeya_cotra @jesswhittles @KatjaGrace Implying that all these people are discussing xrisk purely out of cynical, conspiratorial self interest does not contribute to the conversation
@ajeya_cotra @jesswhittles @KatjaGrace I appreciate your thoughtful comments on this topic in your timeline. It’s great when people engage with the substance of the issues.
@ajeya_cotra I analyze MEDIA COVERAGE = The degree of influence in the mass media (frequent interviews/columns), Not the degree of influence within the AI community (which may differ from how the media portrays the leading voices/experts). 1/2
@ajeya_cotra @jesswhittles @KatjaGrace That’s a small crack in this otherwise rock solid taxonomy 😂. Also interesting how cynical ppl ascribe cynicism to everyone else
@ajeya_cotra @jesswhittles @KatjaGrace You've misunderstood the image, Ajeya.
@ajeya_cotra @jesswhittles @KatjaGrace They don't disagree with you. They have nothing to say about anything you say. They will say you don't exist, and if you say you do, they will just ignore that. They do not engage substantively with AGI/x-risks discourse. At all. They just jeer, sneer and smear.
@ajeya_cotra @jesswhittles @KatjaGrace It’s interesting that the side that takes AI risk seriously has a long list of well-reasoned arguments. Those who disagree with them only have easily tweetable sarcastic soundbites.
@ajeya_cotra @jesswhittles @KatjaGrace I disagree in the strongest possible terms with AI risk arguments, but Cotra is spot on here.
@ajeya_cotra @jesswhittles @KatjaGrace If you don't have good arguments, you should be ignored. This is deadly serious.
@ajeya_cotra @jesswhittles @KatjaGrace The summary tweet and diagram categorizes people as doomers, "experts" (on AI or ethics), or business people, almost as if mutually exclusive categories. It seems to treat expert opinion as valuable rather than subject to incentives as the doomers and business people are.
@ajeya_cotra @jesswhittles @KatjaGrace Not being included in the chart above is no dishonor. I'm not sure whether being ignored for worse reasons is better or worse.
@ajeya_cotra @jesswhittles @KatjaGrace This is an example of the ad-hominem fallback approach to evaluating AI safety/danger arguments: "Why are people saying these scary danger things!? Well, computer science is hard; let's blame things on characteristics of the people or their social positions."
@ajeya_cotra @jesswhittles @KatjaGrace Thanks for speaking out about this, it’s really disappointing how the contributions of so many women working in the field are just…not brought up
@ajeya_cotra @jesswhittles @KatjaGrace There are more concerned experts who have no financial motivation than shown here. Geoffrey Hinton, Mo Gawdat to mention just a couple.