AI is a poorly understood, speculative field, so people with different intuitions come to different conclusions. If your intuition is that AI is inherently dangerous, it makes sense to seriously investigate the AI safety questions, whereas if you don’t, you would focus on the potential benefits and want to accelerate.
I remember when first reading about paperclip maximizer AIs I thought it was stupid, as in anything superintelligent would be capable of understanding instructions. I think this intuition hints at the stronger reason to be more optimistic about AI, which is opposition to the orthogonality thesis.
AI is a poorly understood, speculative field, so people with different intuitions come to different conclusions. If your intuition is that AI is inherently dangerous, it makes sense to seriously investigate the AI safety questions, whereas if you don’t, you would focus on the potential benefits and want to accelerate.
I remember when first reading about paperclip maximizer AIs I thought it was stupid, as in anything superintelligent would be capable of understanding instructions. I think this intuition hints at the stronger reason to be more optimistic about AI, which is opposition to the orthogonality thesis.