Intelligent agents that don't share your worldview can be dangerous. We've seen this a hundred times (e.g. Cortez), I don't think it's controversial or "not par

Intelligent agents that don't share your worldview can be dangerous. We've seen this a hundred times (e.g. Cortez), I don't think it's controversial or "not part of our model". "The LLM research project might lead to intelligent agents that don't share our worldview" should not be too controversial either? You could argue about the odds, but it's very explicitly the stated goal, and they came orders of magnitude than any before them, and most of the founders of the field are doing things like quitting their prestigious jobs or throwing billions of dollars of investor money in their investors' faces, that they have nothing to personally gain from, for the stated reason of trying to prevent this outcome. So we should probably defer to the experts and assume, say, at least 1% that it's a real risk? 10%? It's not fish in the LHC, it's part of one not unreasonable model of what might happen as a result of people spending billions of dollars trying to make it happen. Edit: I see you've made an important edit. Are we still arguing whether it's possible that OpenAI will succeed in creating intelligent autonomous agents, or only about whether we should fear that eventuality?