TBH, I don't find LeCun particularly convincing. I think he's correct but not persuasive, if that makes sense. Debunking AI x-risk is a weird thing to spend ti

TBH, I don't find LeCun particularly convincing. I think he's correct but not persuasive, if that makes sense. Debunking AI x-risk is a weird thing to spend time on. There's really no up-side, and there aren't a bunch of rich people paying for Institutes and Foundations on Non-Breathtaking-Very-Boring-Safety-Research. Also, most of the arguments in favor of x-risk that lawmakers and laypeople find most convincing are unfalsifiable, so it's a bit like arguing against religion in that respect. I don't think there are any public intellectuals in this space doing it well. I'm not sure what to make of that. For myself, I make the argument for focusing on concrete safety problems from within the agencies and companies that are allocating resources. I'm not gifted TED talker.