I'm intrigued as to the thought processes and motivations which lead to this article in light of your previous two weeks of comments and posts.

• I realized that I might have entered some sort of vicious circle of motivated skepticism.
• I can't ask other people to explore both sides of an argument if I don't do so either.
• Someone wrote that I shouldn't ask AI researchers about risks from AI if I don't understand the basic arguments underlying the possibility.
• I was curious if my perception of the arguments in favor of risks from AI is flawed and if I am missing important points. Since I haven't read the Sequences.
• I recently wrote that I agree with 99,99% of what Eliezer Yudkowsky writes. The number was wrong. But I wanted to show that it isn't just made up.
• I don't perceive myself to be a troll at all. Although some unthoughtful comments might have given that impression.

Although it looks like that everyone hates me now, I still don't want to be wrong.

I know that not having read the Sequences is received badly. Especially since I posted a lot in the past. But that's not some incredible evil plan or anything. I am unable to play games I want to play for longer than 20 minutes either. Yet I have to do physical exercises every day for like 2 hours, even though I don't really want to. It sometimes takes me months to read a single book. I think some here underestimate how people can act in a weird way without being evil. I am in psychiatric therapy for 3 years now (yeah, I can prove this).

I can neither get myself to read the Sequences nor am I able to ignore risks from AI. But I am trying.