Content
@
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Ryan Shea — e/acc
@ryanshea.eth
Some have asked about e/acc vs d/acc & so I feel I should say a few words about it: d/acc is cool, and a noble effort, but as defined, it shouldn’t be considered an offshoot of e/acc but antithetical to it & closer to EA. Why? It emphasizes we should be “uniquely careful” with AI, which violates the basic tenet.
3 replies
0 recast
2 reactions
kevin j
@entropybender
the best way to be careful with AI is to accelerate its development, experimentation and usage by as many diverse people as possible. trying to establish laws before benchmarks is nonsensical and more dangerous long term than any chance of rogue AI
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Kelsey Sheely
@knsheely
Is there a d/acc manifesto or something that you are referring to which emphasizes being "uniquely careful?" I didn't really get that impression from Vitalik's explanation.
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
ferostabio.eth
@ferostabio
I feel d/acc was a missed opportunity. Instead of aligning and doing a fork with a focus on decentralization, it raised alarms about safety. It makes sense, I guess, in the current ecosystem, where an ETF and compliance are more important than privacy and anonimity.
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
