After listening to the sam harris + pmarca AI risk chat, I was left a little mystified by some of the arguments pmarca made.

Screenshot of what seemed like important yet weak arguments

I think I agree with this thread's main criticisms

After listening to the sam harris + pmarca AI risk chat, I was left a little mystified by some of the arguments pmarca made.

Screenshot of what seemed like important yet weak arguments

I think I agree with this thread's main criticisms
https://twitter.com/liron/status/1679890530485014529?s=20

The only problem is externality pricing.

Building https://negationgame.com

will give this a listen, but intuitively I do have agree that humans being outcompeted in a microcosm does not generalize to a world that run by AI singularly designed to outcompete humans in a qualifiable way.

𝖒𝖆𝖓𝖉𝖆𝖙𝖚𝖒 𝖆𝖉 𝖆𝖘𝖙𝖗𝖆

admittedly, this conjecture should be debated and explored to a much greater degree, I'm not sold with any of the AI alignment discourse tbqh.

I would say it's partly informed by the research coming out. technique has to work its way through scarce inputs (e.g. API cost in FrugalGPT) + the theory that symbolic regression/weaker models (LATM paper) is more ideal after using the most powerful intelligence exclusively for discovery.

alignment is an issue,...

can you say more, what are you primarily reading / following re alignment?