The phrase "according to researchers" make it sound like these are people who research the question of whether AI could lead to catastrophe. It's actually the

The phrase "according to researchers" make it sound like these are people who research the question of whether AI could lead to catastrophe. It's actually the result of a survey of a sample of NLP researchers, of whom 36% said they "agree" or "weakly agree" that AI could lead to a nuclear-level catastrophe. The exact question is: >It is plausible that decisions made by AI or machine learning systems could cause a catastrophe this century that is at least as bad as an all-out nuclear war. The article presents this as: >Many experts in A.I. and computer science say the technology is likely a watershed moment for human society. But 36% don’t mean that as a positive, warning that decisions made by A.I. could lead to “nuclear-level catastrophe,” This is a very misleading presentation. The 36% are not saying it's "likely", they're saying it's "plausible". They're not issuing a "warning", they're answering a survey question.