> pretty good piece rebutting AI alarmism I only read the text, but I was under the impression it was mainly meant to be a funny Wat-style talk and not a meani

> pretty good piece rebutting AI alarmism I only read the text, but I was under the impression it was mainly meant to be a funny Wat-style talk and not a meaningful rebuttal. If, in fact, this piece is intended as a serious rebuttal then I honestly think it fails. The overwhelming majority of the content is either a funny whataboutism (e.g. Gilligan's Island, pot smoking roommate, the Great Emu War, etc.), or jokes about what could be loosely termed the "AI community". AI 'alarmism', as I understand it, is not predicated on the idea that super-AI is a certainty - merely that it's a possibility. No point raised in this piece gives me a reason to believe that AGI (or whatever) is either impossible or so unlikely that it can be disregarded.