5 ms·
The person you're replying to said "For me the risk of timelines is that they're unknowable due to the unpredictable nature of ASI." So they are predicting >90%
by allturtles 1y ago
The person you're replying to said "For me the risk of timelines is that they're unknowable due to the unpredictable nature of ASI." So they are predicting >90% chance of doom, but not when that will happen. Given that there is already a 100% chance of death at some unknown point in the future, why would this cause GP to start living like a terminal cancer patient (presumably defined as someone with a >99% chance of death in the next year)?
- lava_pidgeon 1y agoI like to point out, that the existence of AGI in the future does change my potential future planning. So I am 35. Do I need save for pensions? Does it make to sense to start family? These aren't 1 year questions but 20 years ahead questions...
- amarcheschi 1y agoIf you're so terrorized of Ai to not start a family despite wanting and being able to, it must be miserable (if) to eventually live through the years as everyone that tried to predict the end of the world did (except for those who died of other causes before the predicted end)
- kypro 1y agoTo be clear, currently I think it's likely within the next 10 years we'll have ASI. But I think it's also quite possible that we won't have ASI for 20-30 years, and it's quite possible that moderate advancements in AI will be destabilising enough that we never reach ASI. I think a lot of people who talk about AI risk underweight the fairly likely scenario that highly capable narrow AIs are leveraged in ways that lead to civilisational collapse. Humans getting to ASI assumes that prior advancements are not destabilising or if they are destabilising the advancements happen quickly enough that it doesn't matter. That said, I think ASI is more likely that not. And I think ASI within 5-10 years is very likely.