))
“Safety researchers should take a public stance” by Ishual, Mateusz Bagiński
Manage episode 507408781 series 3364758
เนื้อหาจัดทำโดย LessWrong เนื้อหาพอดแคสต์ทั้งหมด รวมถึงตอน กราฟิก และคำอธิบายพอดแคสต์ได้รับการอัปโหลดและจัดหาให้โดยตรงจาก LessWrong หรือพันธมิตรแพลตฟอร์มพอดแคสต์ของพวกเขา หากคุณเชื่อว่ามีบุคคลอื่นใช้งานที่มีลิขสิทธิ์ของคุณโดยไม่ได้รับอนุญาต คุณสามารถปฏิบัติตามขั้นตอนที่แสดงไว้ที่นี่ https://th.player.fm/legal
[Co-written by Mateusz Bagiński and Samuel Buteau (Ishual)]
TL;DR
Many X-risk-concerned people who join AI capabilities labs with the intent to contribute to existential safety think that the labs are currently engaging in a race that is unacceptably likely to lead to human disempowerment and/or extinction, and would prefer an AGI ban[1] over the current path. This post makes the case that such people should speak out publicly[2] against the current AI R&D regime and in favor of an AGI ban[3]. They should explicitly communicate that a saner world would coordinate not to build existentially dangerous intelligences, at least until we know how to do it in a principled, safe way. They could choose to maintain their political capital by not calling the current AI R&D regime insane, or find a way to lean into this valid persona of “we will either cooperate (if enough others cooperate) or win [...]
---
Outline:
(00:16) TL;DR
(02:02) Quotes
(03:22) The default strategy of marginal improvement from within the belly of a beast
(06:59) Noble intention murphyjitsu
(09:35) The need for a better strategy
The original text contained 8 footnotes which were omitted from this narration.
---
First published:
September 19th, 2025
Source:
https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/fF8pvsn3AGQhYsbjp/safety-researchers-should-take-a-public-stance
---
Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO.
…
continue reading
TL;DR
Many X-risk-concerned people who join AI capabilities labs with the intent to contribute to existential safety think that the labs are currently engaging in a race that is unacceptably likely to lead to human disempowerment and/or extinction, and would prefer an AGI ban[1] over the current path. This post makes the case that such people should speak out publicly[2] against the current AI R&D regime and in favor of an AGI ban[3]. They should explicitly communicate that a saner world would coordinate not to build existentially dangerous intelligences, at least until we know how to do it in a principled, safe way. They could choose to maintain their political capital by not calling the current AI R&D regime insane, or find a way to lean into this valid persona of “we will either cooperate (if enough others cooperate) or win [...]
---
Outline:
(00:16) TL;DR
(02:02) Quotes
(03:22) The default strategy of marginal improvement from within the belly of a beast
(06:59) Noble intention murphyjitsu
(09:35) The need for a better strategy
The original text contained 8 footnotes which were omitted from this narration.
---
First published:
September 19th, 2025
Source:
https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/fF8pvsn3AGQhYsbjp/safety-researchers-should-take-a-public-stance
---
Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO.
617 ตอน
แบ่งปัน
