← Back to context

Comment by deepwoods

6 hours ago

I see what you mean. I meant more that they genuinely believe the tech is dangerous, not that they are necessarily doing the right thing.

4 comments

deepwoods

Reply
ElProlactin  6 hours ago

If they genuinely believe the tech is dangerous, how would it be acting in "good faith" to keep developing it, prepping an IPO, etc.?

  • jimkleiber  23 minutes ago

    They believe the tech is currently powerful and may become super super powerful very soon, and powerful tools can help us and can hurt us. Nuclear fission can provide so much energy to power our society and kill millions of beings.

    So, i think they're hopeful for the help and terrified of the harms and are maybe trying to slow down on the amplifier of those effects for now.

  • jonas21  3 hours ago

    The entire essay is about stopping development until it can be made more safe, with specific ideas on how to do that.

    The fact that he would suggest this despite preparing for an IPO is an even stronger signal that it's in good faith -- it will almost certainly delay or reduce the valuation of the IPO.

    • ElProlactin  2 hours ago

      > The fact that he would suggest this despite preparing for an IPO is an even stronger signal that it's in good faith -- it will almost certainly delay or reduce the valuation of the IPO.

      No it won't.

      This is a call for a "safety cartel"[1] in which the dominant firms become more entrenched against competition by colluding to limit the progress would-be competitors can make in the market.

      [1] https://x.com/alexwg/status/2098793433275985932