21h ago

Daniel Eth, an independent AI governance researcher, argues that inserting 'quite possibly' weakens an AI development claim compared to using 'likely'.

Matthew Barnett replied the original wording lacked clarity.

——0——
Original post
OPDaniel Eth (yes, Eth is my actual last name)#1943Daniel Eth (yes, Eth is my actual last name)@DANIEL_271828

@tamaybes @RyanPGreenblatt Seems pretty clear to me that this is what it says? She literally adds “quite possibly” between claim 1 and 2, which is much weaker than simply “likely”

11:11 PM · May 22, 2026 View on X
REPLYMatthew Barnett#1343Matthew Barnett@MATTHEWJBAR

@BethMayBarnes @BronsonSchoen @tamaybes @GuiveAssadi That's quite possible. :)

Someone upthread said it was "pretty obvious" that you meant the claim was "fairly likely", which is not compatible with 5% credence. This suggests the language was not clear.

Elizabeth BarnesElizabeth Barnes@BethMayBarnes

@MatthewJBar @BronsonSchoen @tamaybes @GuiveAssadi Ah, I'm not sure we actually disagree a ton on substance then - maybe just a communication issue? "quite possibly" is pretty compatible with 5% in my mind. Is this a "brits and americans use 'quite' differently" thing maybe?

8:04 PM · May 23, 2026 · 88 Views
8:10 PM · May 23, 2026 · 68 Views