It is called ‘A deep critique of AI 2027’s bad timeline model,’ one could simply not use the word ‘bad’ here and we would still know you have strong disagreements with it,
I think it was meant as a critique of 2027′s models of bad timelines; was that not the case?
I don’t think this interpretation can hold up: the body of titotal’s post doesn’t deal with the good vs bad timeline. It’s just about the uncertainty of modelling AI progress which applies for both the good and bad timelines.
I think it was meant as a critique of 2027′s models of bad timelines; was that not the case?
I read it how Zvi did.
I don’t think this interpretation can hold up: the body of titotal’s post doesn’t deal with the good vs bad timeline. It’s just about the uncertainty of modelling AI progress which applies for both the good and bad timelines.