You raise such good points, Devansh (and thank you for the kind mention, BTW) - your reference to António Guterres’ warning about AI risks at Davos couldn’t be more on point. The ‘magic’ you speak of is a well-understood phenomenon in psychology as much as in the risk analysis and threat assessment world. Horror fiction aficionados are also intimately familiar with it: the monster left to our imagination will always beat whatever writer or CGI creator can come up with.
Rem: Uncertainty=Anxiety
Interestingly enough, one of the few relatively defendable X-risk drivers (the development of super easy-to-produce yet super-deadly biochemical compounds) also seems to be based on very limited/questionable research (this is a terrific piece on the subject: https://1a3orn.com/sub/essays-propaganda-or-science.html )
In hindsight (which could mean even in a few months), we'll see this AI X risk saga as the most notorious and impactful case of the 'availability cascade' - which will make Y2K and the Segway hype look like child's play.
But your point might deserve an even deeper exploration (maybe a dedicated post?) - could this AI X risks hype cycle carry its own larger risks? A giant red herring distracting us from what is actually harming us?
Most of the debate about recent cracks in the liberal democratic world order in this election-heavy 2024 appears to have shifted from (measurable and documented) disinformation, the rejection of expertise, and the adoption of post-truth political strategies to AI - as if all of the former hadn't preceded it.
Similarly, it wasn't a Terminator AI that fueled the US and global vaccine hesitancy or climate denialism. Yet, aside from acute threats like high-yield weapons or pandemic disease, it would be exactly how you would produce a survival and longevity trend reversal and lead our species toward extinction.
…I could go on and on. Again - keep up this great ‘thought’ experiment.
I really like your writing. However, I want to point out an area where you could use some research.
“Climate Risk has already manifested as massive weather deviations. “
No. Climate is not weather. Weather is not climate. A current media fallacy is to blame every weather ’event’ on climate change. That is fear mongering, click-bait, outright wrong and sucessful marketing. It is spread by ideologues with an agenda, who are advancing a narrative. Do not confuse that with science. Weather has caused loss and devastation as long as there have been people.
A good place to learn more is the Honest Broker Substack with Roger Pilke Jr. He is a professor from CU Boulder, who has testified before Congress multiple times. He covers a lot of controversies in clear tems.
" Weather has caused loss and devastation as long as there have been people."- True, but here are a few things to consider. I first started really hearing about Climate change in 2007. Things have happened in accordance to their predictions- in what happened, when it happened, and where it happened. For a simple example- the recent years have been significantly warmer across various places I've in. Especially the winters.
Roger himself doesn't seem to be a climate scientist, or have any kind of training in the field. While formal education can be replaced by self-taught expertise, it is still worth considering this fact. Many of his claims have been refuted by climate scientists, as you can see here- https://skepticalscience.com/Roger_Pielke_Jr_blog.htm
You raise such good points, Devansh (and thank you for the kind mention, BTW) - your reference to António Guterres’ warning about AI risks at Davos couldn’t be more on point. The ‘magic’ you speak of is a well-understood phenomenon in psychology as much as in the risk analysis and threat assessment world. Horror fiction aficionados are also intimately familiar with it: the monster left to our imagination will always beat whatever writer or CGI creator can come up with.
Rem: Uncertainty=Anxiety
Interestingly enough, one of the few relatively defendable X-risk drivers (the development of super easy-to-produce yet super-deadly biochemical compounds) also seems to be based on very limited/questionable research (this is a terrific piece on the subject: https://1a3orn.com/sub/essays-propaganda-or-science.html )
In hindsight (which could mean even in a few months), we'll see this AI X risk saga as the most notorious and impactful case of the 'availability cascade' - which will make Y2K and the Segway hype look like child's play.
But your point might deserve an even deeper exploration (maybe a dedicated post?) - could this AI X risks hype cycle carry its own larger risks? A giant red herring distracting us from what is actually harming us?
Most of the debate about recent cracks in the liberal democratic world order in this election-heavy 2024 appears to have shifted from (measurable and documented) disinformation, the rejection of expertise, and the adoption of post-truth political strategies to AI - as if all of the former hadn't preceded it.
Similarly, it wasn't a Terminator AI that fueled the US and global vaccine hesitancy or climate denialism. Yet, aside from acute threats like high-yield weapons or pandemic disease, it would be exactly how you would produce a survival and longevity trend reversal and lead our species toward extinction.
…I could go on and on. Again - keep up this great ‘thought’ experiment.
What a great share. Thank you
I really like your writing. However, I want to point out an area where you could use some research.
“Climate Risk has already manifested as massive weather deviations. “
No. Climate is not weather. Weather is not climate. A current media fallacy is to blame every weather ’event’ on climate change. That is fear mongering, click-bait, outright wrong and sucessful marketing. It is spread by ideologues with an agenda, who are advancing a narrative. Do not confuse that with science. Weather has caused loss and devastation as long as there have been people.
A good place to learn more is the Honest Broker Substack with Roger Pilke Jr. He is a professor from CU Boulder, who has testified before Congress multiple times. He covers a lot of controversies in clear tems.
Other than that, great piece. Thanks.
I'll read into this thank you.
" Weather has caused loss and devastation as long as there have been people."- True, but here are a few things to consider. I first started really hearing about Climate change in 2007. Things have happened in accordance to their predictions- in what happened, when it happened, and where it happened. For a simple example- the recent years have been significantly warmer across various places I've in. Especially the winters.
Roger himself doesn't seem to be a climate scientist, or have any kind of training in the field. While formal education can be replaced by self-taught expertise, it is still worth considering this fact. Many of his claims have been refuted by climate scientists, as you can see here- https://skepticalscience.com/Roger_Pielke_Jr_blog.htm
Are there corporate interests linked to climate doom, absolutely. But let's not forget that also swings the other way- https://artificialintelligencemadesimple.substack.com/p/profiteering-from-a-billion-deaths