Share
BBC Radio 5 live’s award winning gaming podcast, discussing the world of video games and games culture.
…
continue reading
Manage episode 507408782 series 3364760
Content provided by LessWrong. All podcast content including episodes, graphics, and podcast descriptions are uploaded and provided directly by LessWrong or their podcast platform partner. If you believe someone is using your copyrighted work without your permission, you can follow the process outlined here https://staging.podcastplayer.com/legal.
[Co-written by Mateusz Bagiński and Samuel Buteau (Ishual)]
TL;DR
Many X-risk-concerned people who join AI capabilities labs with the intent to contribute to existential safety think that the labs are currently engaging in a race that is unacceptably likely to lead to human disempowerment and/or extinction, and would prefer an AGI ban[1] over the current path. This post makes the case that such people should speak out publicly[2] against the current AI R&D regime and in favor of an AGI ban[3]. They should explicitly communicate that a saner world would coordinate not to build existentially dangerous intelligences, at least until we know how to do it in a principled, safe way. They could choose to maintain their political capital by not calling the current AI R&D regime insane, or find a way to lean into this valid persona of “we will either cooperate (if enough others cooperate) or win [...]
---
Outline:
(00:16) TL;DR
(02:02) Quotes
(03:22) The default strategy of marginal improvement from within the belly of a beast
(06:59) Noble intention murphyjitsu
(09:35) The need for a better strategy
The original text contained 8 footnotes which were omitted from this narration.
---
First published:
September 19th, 2025
Source:
https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/fF8pvsn3AGQhYsbjp/safety-researchers-should-take-a-public-stance
---
Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO.
…
continue reading
TL;DR
Many X-risk-concerned people who join AI capabilities labs with the intent to contribute to existential safety think that the labs are currently engaging in a race that is unacceptably likely to lead to human disempowerment and/or extinction, and would prefer an AGI ban[1] over the current path. This post makes the case that such people should speak out publicly[2] against the current AI R&D regime and in favor of an AGI ban[3]. They should explicitly communicate that a saner world would coordinate not to build existentially dangerous intelligences, at least until we know how to do it in a principled, safe way. They could choose to maintain their political capital by not calling the current AI R&D regime insane, or find a way to lean into this valid persona of “we will either cooperate (if enough others cooperate) or win [...]
---
Outline:
(00:16) TL;DR
(02:02) Quotes
(03:22) The default strategy of marginal improvement from within the belly of a beast
(06:59) Noble intention murphyjitsu
(09:35) The need for a better strategy
The original text contained 8 footnotes which were omitted from this narration.
---
First published:
September 19th, 2025
Source:
https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/fF8pvsn3AGQhYsbjp/safety-researchers-should-take-a-public-stance
---
Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO.
632 episodes
))
