More people should write basic AI safety explainers
Source ↗
👁 0
💬 0
I think people continue to underrate the value of writing the clearest, most basic, simplest possible case for important parts of AI safety. For example, before I wrote my own explainer for the simplest possible case for AI doom, I noticed that all existing explainers, of which there aren't many, had multiple of the six problems below: They have too many extraneous detailsThey appeal to overly complex analogiesThey seem to spend much of their time responding to insider debates and come across as
Comments (0)