I think the main argument I'm able to extract from the piece is that doom fears are unconstructive, and/or just involve giving the tech industry more power and/or fuel scary AI? Like, they write:
> First, the spectre of AI as an all-powerful machine fuels competition between nations to develop AI so that they can benefit from and control it. This works to the advantage of tech firms: it encourages investment and weakens arguments for regulating the industry.
and
> Fearmongering narratives about existential risks are not constructive.
If AI doom were a real threat, but the only thing that happened when you talked about it was that tech firms made more scary AI, then I think it would make sense to instead focus on other risks? That said, it's a strange premise to take for granted.
I think the main argument I'm able to extract from the piece is that doom fears are unconstructive, and/or just involve giving the tech industry more power and/or fuel scary AI? Like, they write:
> First, the spectre of AI as an all-powerful machine fuels competition between nations to develop AI so that they can benefit from and control it. This works to the advantage of tech firms: it encourages investment and weakens arguments for regulating the industry.
and
> Fearmongering narratives about existential risks are not constructive.
If AI doom were a real threat, but the only thing that happened when you talked about it was that tech firms made more scary AI, then I think it would make sense to instead focus on other risks? That said, it's a strange premise to take for granted.