I am not claiming that the alignment situation is very clear at this point. I acknowledge that LLMs do not indicate that the problem is completely solved, and we will need to adjust our views as AI gets more capable.

I'm just asking people to acknowledge the evidence in front of their eyes, which (from my perspective) clearly contradicts the picture you'd get from a ton of AI alignment writing from before ~2019. This literature talked extensively about the difficulty of specifying goals in general AI in a way that avoided unintended side effects.

To the extent that LLMs are general AIs that can execute our intended instructions, as we want them to, rather than as part of a deceptive strategy to take over the world, this seems like clear evidence that the problem of building safe general AIs might be easy (and indeed easier than we thought).

Yes, this evidence is not conclusive. It is not zero either.