> He refuses to engage earnestly with the “doomer” arguments. The same type of motivated reasoning could also be attributed to himself and Meta’s financial goals - it’s not a persuasive framing.
Exactly my thoughts too.
I don't agree with the Eliezer doomsday scenario either, but it's hard to be convinced by a scientist who refuses to engage in discussion about the flagged risks and instead panders to the public's fear of fear-mongering and power-seizing.
Exactly my thoughts too.
I don't agree with the Eliezer doomsday scenario either, but it's hard to be convinced by a scientist who refuses to engage in discussion about the flagged risks and instead panders to the public's fear of fear-mongering and power-seizing.