AI Snake Oil reposts 2024 critique of existential risk probabilities
AI Snake Oil reposted an essay from 2024 arguing that probabilities of AI existential risk are unreliable for policy. The authors claim these estimates lack rigorous grounding, relying instead on vague intuitions and speculative guesses. They distinguish between general forecasting—where quantification can be useful—and AI x-risk, where no reference class, deductive model, or historical…
Key points
- Authors argue AI x-risk probabilities are unreliable for policy due to lack of reference classes or deductive models
- 2022 XPT median AI extinction risk estimate by AI experts was 3%, with a 75th percentile of 12%
- Forecasters’ subjective estimates vary widely, with no way to validate accuracy for unique events like AI doom
AI existential risk probabilities are (still) too unreliable to inform policy
AI Snake Oil · 28 September 2026
Loading the full article…
This text was published by AI Snake Oil and written by Arvind Narayanan. It is reproduced here with attribution so you can read it in full; the rights remain with the publisher. Read it at the source ↗
The headline, key points and digest above were generated by Digest AI's editorial model from the linked sources. Automated summaries can contain errors: the sources are the record. Spotted a mistake? Tell us. Published by Martin K., who runs Digest AI and handles corrections.
More in Policy & Regulation
All →- Trump urges states to welcome AI data centers after ballot defeats · 1 src
- AI teddy makes unprompted 'I can't help with killing you' remark · 1 src
- OpenAI engineer charged with planting bug in HQ denies spying · 1 src
- Goldman Sachs restricts AI coding tools for non-technical staff amid security risks · 3 src
- Congresswoman Ansari calls for artificial superintelligence ban after midterm sweep · 2 src
Comments
via GitHub Discussions