It's goofy when people criticize people advocating AI safety for not disclosing ties to Effective Altruism. It's like if someone wrote an op-ed in favor of tax cuts and people criticized her for failing to disclose ties to the conservative movement.
Post
Conversation
There is a reason people disclose their affiliations underneath their op eds.
Good analogy here is 2010, where incumbent Dems tried to define GOP as Koch-funded racists, incumbent GOP is trying to define Dems as woke doomer freaks now. It won't work.
Dems + some AI people are wisely encouraging it, since neither want AI industry to be totally GOP-coded.
It's not uncommon for a journalist to point out potential conflicts of interest that an interviewee might have, or other reasons they might not be so credible. Especially useful info that someone has doomsday cult beliefs if they're telling you the day of AI judgment is coming
Well if being a woke goofball is a precursor to AI safety then there will simply be no AI safety.
Discover more
Sourced from across X
Briefly, on why I pay attention to the EA/rationalists:
Imagine you have an extremely nerdy friend who, in the mid-2000s, would not shut up about how Donald Trump was going to become president and reshape American politics. "Stop saying weird shit," you say. "He's a joke. He's a
There are a lot of criticisms you can make of EAs (indeed, I make some in my book) but I don't think the EAs are particularly woke and the rationalists more broadly tend toward being anti-woke. Like they're not doing land acknowledgments at the Manifest conference.
a lot of people work at METR so you can do the left version of this where they're all white men too if you want:
You might be surprised by this thread. You might think it doesn't comport with what you've heard.
That's because it's by an ideologue who is deliberately trying to mislead you.
The most discussed rogue AI event, deemed the "HuggingFace Incident," is not described by this x.com/brianchau57/st
This post is unavailable.