For more context, Eliezer does himself a disservice focusing so hard on examples of how things could go horribly wrong but I haven't heard any compelling argume

For more context, Eliezer does himself a disservice focusing so hard on examples of how things could go horribly wrong but I haven't heard any compelling arguments against his core points. From everything I've seen from him, his concerns revolve around (1) a lack of a bounding function for the development of AI (2) a view that the alignment problem is unsolvable and (3) the risk that we won't recognize an AI was developed until it is sufficiently more intelligent than us to pose a fundamental risk.