Analogously, someone could write “antibiotics are a non-starter because lots of infections aren’t even bacterial.” That would be pretty uncompelling to someone who thought that bacterial infections were a major risk.
The fact that an approach doesn’t solve all problems doesn’t mean it “does not and cannot contribute to long-term safety,” that seems hyperbolic and kind of ridiculous.
The fact that an approach cannot solve that interactions of AGI necessarily converge on total human extinction beyond theoretical limits of controllability does mean that it cannot contribute to long-term AGI safety.
You have not considered that convergent dynamic yet. Nor have you checked with me whether your paraphrase of my arguments is correct (it is not).
Analogously, someone could write “antibiotics are a non-starter because lots of infections aren’t even bacterial.” That would be pretty uncompelling to someone who thought that bacterial infections were a major risk.
The fact that an approach doesn’t solve all problems doesn’t mean it “does not and cannot contribute to long-term safety,” that seems hyperbolic and kind of ridiculous.
You’re missing context. Feel free to ask further.
The fact that an approach cannot solve that interactions of AGI necessarily converge on total human extinction beyond theoretical limits of controllability does mean that it cannot contribute to long-term AGI safety.
You have not considered that convergent dynamic yet. Nor have you checked with me whether your paraphrase of my arguments is correct (it is not).