AI-risk-avoiders are more power-seeking than most movements.
Are you saying that AIS movement is more power-seeking than environmentalist movement that spent 30M$+ on lobbying in single 2023 and has political parties in 90 countries, in five countries—in ruling coalition? For comparison, this paper in Politico with maximally negative attitude mentions AIS lobbying around 2M$.
Until recently the MIRI default plan was basically “obtain god-like AI and use it to take over the world”
It’s like saying “NASA default plan is to spread light of consciousness across the stars”, which is kinda technically true, but in reality NASA actions are not as cool as this phrase implies. “MIRI default plan” was “to do math in hope that some of this math will turn out to be useful”.
Are you saying that AIS movement is more power-seeking than environmentalist movement that spent 30M$+[...]
I think that AIS lobbying is likely to have more consequential and enduring effects on the world than environmental lobbying regardless of the absolute size in body count or amount of money, so yes.
“MIRI default plan” was “to do math in hope that some of this math will turn out to be useful”.
I mean yeah, that is a better description of their publicly-known day-to-day actions, but intention also matters. They settled on math after it became clear that the god AI plan was not achievable(and recently, gave up on the math plan too when it became clear that was not realistic). An analogy might be an environmental group that planned to end pollution by bio-engineering a microbe to spread throughout the world that made oil production impossible, then reluctantly settled for lobbying once they realized they couldn’t actually make the microbe. I think this would be a pretty unusually power-seeking plan for an environmental group!
The point of the OP is not about effects, it’s about AIS being visibly more power-seeking than other movements and causing backlash in response to visible activity.
Are you saying that AIS movement is more power-seeking than environmentalist movement that spent 30M$+ on lobbying in single 2023 and has political parties in 90 countries, in five countries—in ruling coalition? For comparison, this paper in Politico with maximally negative attitude mentions AIS lobbying around 2M$.
It’s like saying “NASA default plan is to spread light of consciousness across the stars”, which is kinda technically true, but in reality NASA actions are not as cool as this phrase implies. “MIRI default plan” was “to do math in hope that some of this math will turn out to be useful”.
I think that AIS lobbying is likely to have more consequential and enduring effects on the world than environmental lobbying regardless of the absolute size in body count or amount of money, so yes.
I mean yeah, that is a better description of their publicly-known day-to-day actions, but intention also matters. They settled on math after it became clear that the god AI plan was not achievable(and recently, gave up on the math plan too when it became clear that was not realistic). An analogy might be an environmental group that planned to end pollution by bio-engineering a microbe to spread throughout the world that made oil production impossible, then reluctantly settled for lobbying once they realized they couldn’t actually make the microbe. I think this would be a pretty unusually power-seeking plan for an environmental group!
The point of the OP is not about effects, it’s about AIS being visibly more power-seeking than other movements and causing backlash in response to visible activity.