that's used in those circles a lot, their probability of doom, the percentage chance they ascribe to sort of a human life ending event is very high and they believe that realistically. I think that there's probably the inverse of that on the acceleration aside who think that genuinely AI will, if given the chance in 10 years, solve cancer and solve, you know, and all these things would sort of prevent human flourishing. And so it becomes, you know, Mark Andreessen literally argued that it's a form of violence to not allow this to proceed in his techno-optimist manifesto. Then I think you have others who are just sort of generally think that the AI safety folks are sort of crying about nothing and making fallacious arguments and it's stupid, you know, and then you have sort of the libertarian set who doesn't want sort of government to be involved in this and say, you know, if they do this, then, you know, where does it stop? And, you know, so there's all these different dimensions. It's (36/57)
You are viewing a single comment's thread from: