LESSWRONG
LW

Adam David Long

Message

145

The "public debate" about AI is confusing for the general public and for policymakers because it is a three-sided debate

Summary of Argument: The public debate among AI experts is confusing because there are, to a first approximation, three sides, not two sides to the debate. I refer to this as a 🔺three-sided framework, and I argue that using this three-sided framework will help clarify the debate (more precisely, debates)...

Aug 1, 2023•146

Adam David Long

145

Adam David Long — LessWrong

Adam David Long

Message

145

The "public debate" about AI is confusing for the general public and for policymakers because it is a three-sided debate

Aug 1, 2023•146

Adam David Long

145

The "public debate" about AI is confusing for the general public and for policymakers because it is a three-sided debate

Adam David Long

Summary of Argument: The public debate among AI experts is confusing because there are, to a first approximation, three sides, not two sides to the debate. I refer to this as a 🔺three-sided framework, and I argue that using this three-sided framework will help clarify the debate (more precisely, debates) for the general public and for policy-makers.

Broadly speaking, under my proposed 🔺three-sided framework, the positions fall into three broad clusters:

AI "pragmatists" or realists are most worried about AI and power. Examples of experts who are (roughly) in this cluster would be Melanie Mitchell, Timnit Gebru, Kate Crawford, Gary Marcus, Klon Kitchen, and Michael Lind. For experts in this group, the biggest concern is how

... (read 913 more words →)

146