This is a special post for quick takes by habryka. Only they can create top-level comments. Comments here also appear on the Quick Takes page and All Posts page.
In an attempt to get myself to write more here is my own shortform feed. Ideally I would write something daily, but we will see how it goes.
advocating for regulating AI on the basis of harms like this is bad, will eventually backfire, and should be modeled as a cost, not as a benefit, from the perspective of predicting how useful his actions will be on AI safety topics.
My main crux is the societal awareness[1] around capabilities of existing and future AIs and robots. I once remarked that laypeople do NOT foresee AI taking over the world because they fail to understand[2] the true extent of AIs' transformative potential to the point of believing that the AIs have zero reasoning abilities.
A layperson who believed such nonsense would also believe that the AIs are at most toys capable of doing things like driving people into psychosis or destroying people's relationships, but not of wiping mankind out and sustaining the civilisation. Therefore, I don't understand how a safetyist can win the 2026 election while not making Bores-like factual errors.
UPD: on March 14 I remarked that the IABIED march had gathered 898 pledgers and 1630 people who signed to be notified of IABIED's activities. By June 19 these numbers reached only 1105 and 1991.
In an attempt to get myself to write more here is my own shortform feed. Ideally I would write something daily, but we will see how it goes.