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

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

The models are historical/anthropological. Whenever a higher intelligence species encounters a lower intelligence species, or more advanced civilization encounters a less advanced one, the outcome is predictable.

musician: gigameshmusic.com | dev: github.com/gigamesh

Interested in social infrastructure (URL & IRL) | slowly building /firstdraft, curating /concretejungle | markfishman.xyz

Literally stop providing energy to the computers powering it.

the argument is going to be that once the AI code is incentivizing humans around the world to run it (kinda like bitcoin/ethereum) you wont be able to unplug it

software engineer / adventurer / musician / probably a simulation

Technology would never evolve into a religion!

Technology would never evolve into a religion!

https://youtu.be/I-pulhtgHHo