conv.

All stories
AIQuiet 9d · day 10

National Review publishes case against AI doomerism

Conservative outlet argues against existential AI risk narratives, citing competitive pressure.

What to know

  • National Review argues that fear of AI risks should not drive policy that disadvantages U.S. technological competition.
  • The editorial circulated on social media with users amplifying the anti-doomerism argument.
  • The piece engages with standard existential AI risk frameworks before presenting a counterargument.
most voices

AI existential risk concerns are overblown and undermine necessary technological competition.

  • “This is the case against AI doom. Pass it on”

    @esrtweet · X ↗

“We can't afford to fall behind.”

National Review · National Review ↗

National Review Publisher

National Review publishes case against AI doomerism
x.com

How it unfolded 2 developments, newest first · click a bar or a number to jump articlesposts

Peak 1 piece in 3h at Sep 16, 6 AM; 2 pieces over 10 days (1 article · 1 post) Sep 16, 6 AM — 1 piece · 1 article — Newswires 1Sep 16, 9 AM — quietSep 16, 12 PM — quietSep 16, 3 PM — quietSep 16, 6 PM — quietSep 16, 9 PM — quietSep 17, 12 AM — quietSep 17, 3 AM — quietSep 17, 6 AM — 1 piece · 1 post — X 1Sep 17, 9 AM — quietSep 17, 12 PM — quietSep 17, 3 PM — quietSep 17, 6 PM — quietSep 17, 9 PM — quietSep 18, 12 AM — quietSep 18, 3 AM — quietSep 18, 6 AM — quietSep 18, 9 AM — quietSep 18, 12 PM — quietSep 18, 3 PM — quietSep 18, 6 PM — quietSep 18, 9 PM — quietSep 19, 12 AM — quietSep 19, 3 AM — quietSep 19, 6 AM — quietSep 19, 9 AM — quietSep 19, 12 PM — quietSep 19, 3 PM — quietSep 19, 6 PM — quietSep 19, 9 PM — quietSep 20, 12 AM — quietSep 20, 3 AM — quietSep 20, 6 AM — quietSep 20, 9 AM — quietSep 20, 12 PM — quietSep 20, 3 PM — quietSep 20, 6 PM — quietSep 20, 9 PM — quietSep 21, 12 AM — quietSep 21, 3 AM — quietSep 21, 6 AM — quietSep 21, 9 AM — quietSep 21, 12 PM — quietSep 21, 3 PM — quietSep 21, 6 PM — quietSep 21, 9 PM — quietSep 22, 12 AM — quietSep 22, 3 AM — quietSep 22, 6 AM — quietSep 22, 9 AM — quietSep 22, 12 PM — quietSep 22, 3 PM — quietSep 22, 6 PM — quietSep 22, 9 PM — quietSep 23, 12 AM — quietSep 23, 3 AM — quietSep 23, 6 AM — quietSep 23, 9 AM — quietSep 23, 12 PM — quietSep 23, 3 PM — quietSep 23, 6 PM — quietSep 23, 9 PM — quietSep 24, 12 AM — quietSep 24, 3 AM — quietSep 24, 6 AM — quietSep 24, 9 AM — quietSep 24, 12 PM — quietSep 24, 3 PM — quietSep 24, 6 PM — quietSep 24, 9 PM — quietYesterday, 12 AM — quietYesterday, 3 AM — quietYesterday, 6 AM — quietYesterday, 9 AM — quietYesterday, 12 PM — quietYesterday, 3 PM — quietYesterday, 6 PM — quietYesterday, 9 PM — quietToday, 12 AM — quietToday, 3 AM — quietToday, 6 AM — quietToday, 9 AM — quietToday, 12 PM — quietToday, 3 PM — quiet 12
Sep 17Sep 18Sep 19Sep 20Sep 21Sep 22Sep 23Sep 24yesterdaynow · 5:15 PM ET
  1. 2

    Editorial gains social media traction as case against AI existential risk

    The National Review editorial circulated widely on X, with users sharing the argument as a statement against AI doomsday scenarios. An X user summarized the case as starting from standard existential risk arguments before presenting counterpoints.

    “This is the case against AI doom. Pass it on…”
    — @esrtweet
    • This is the case against AI doom. Pass it on First we recaptulate standard x-risk argument: we build AI substantially smarter than humans → it becomes an autonomous optimizing agent → its goals are misaligned → instrumental convergence makes it seek power and resist

      @esrtweetX9d ago498▲view on X ↗
  2. 1

    National Review publishes editorial against AI doomerism

    The National Review published an editorial titled "Against AI Doomerism" arguing that concerns about existential AI risks should not drive policy decisions that could disadvantage American technological development.

    1. first by National Review, 10d ago

What people are saying 0 voices from 0 sites · best of 1 · verbatim