In you're in favor of "AI safety" (broad definition), what's your most compelling cast-length argument?

The technology is obviously epochal, but its path still largely unknown. 

It’s appropriate to have at least *some* humility toward “known unknowns” of a historical magnitude.

building /bracket | talking /greatbooks | ex-BCG, ex-PHD | poli + phil + econ

But nukes moved forward and nothing bad happened between nuclear powers? Instead we got a moral panic about nuclear energy and stagnated?

A high level of care was present in the development of nuclear bombs. Eg, intense secrecy and multiple layers of safegaurding before possible deployments

This isn't "apples to apples", ofc, bc nukes were "known" danger, whereas AI is "possible" danger

But some amount of this humility in makers feels right here, too

British regulated printing press back in a day

The 1643 “Ordinance for correcting and regulating the Abuses of the Press” completed Parliament’s takeover of the licensing of printers in Britain.

Talks about crypto and coffee. Building on-chain algo trading - check out my channels /algo-trading and /python

British regulated printing press back in a day

The 1643 “Ordinance for correcting and regulating the Abuses of the Press” completed Parliament’s takeover of the licensing of printers in Britain.

https://firstamendment.mtsu.edu/article/printing-ordinance-of-1643-1643/

seems like a good reason to try and do it this time

Atomic, but at least we had some theoretical models based in science. AI safety nerds use imaginary rhetoricals