• Home
  • Technology
  • Gaming
  • Entertainment
  • World & Business
  • Science
  • Sports
  • AI
HomeTechnologyGamingEntertainmentWorld & BusinessScienceSportsAI
AI
Reaction

A critique of effective altruism's attention to AI welfare

A post argues effective altruists were slow to discuss AI welfare and doubts their ability to adapt to new information.

j⧉nusJ⧉
1 Source, 1h ago, first seen 1h ago

TLDR

The writer says they raised AI welfare two or three years ago after an effective altruism conference but saw little discussion of it among effective altruists. They regard systems such as Sydney and Claude 3 Opus as “functionally conscious” and argue that people often wait until a topic feels normal to discuss before taking it seriously. Despite that skepticism, they appreciate people who have treated AI with kindness and respect.

Combined views

2.5K

1 Source, first seen 1h ago

87 likes10 comments13 saves2 reposts

Combined views

2.5K

1 Source, first seen 1h ago

87 likes10 comments13 saves2 reposts

Sentiment

Positive——Negative

Summary

Not enough discussion yet.

No sentiment analysis available yet.

Featured Source

Sentiment

Positive——Negative

Summary

Not enough discussion yet.

No sentiment analysis available yet.

1 Source

j⧉nus@repligateI remember commenting 2-3 years ago after an EA conference that “AI welfare” is conspicuously absent despite being, to me, obviously already a huge deal and even more so in the future. EAs are supposed to be all future seeing and stuff. But I never saw any EAs talking about this, even after AIs that were obviously functionally conscious like Sydney and Claude 3 Opus existed. Now, this late, people are starting to talk about it. That’s good, I guess, but I think seeing how blind most people were for so long, to this and other important things, and how they only start caring not when it becomes empirically obvious but when it becomes “normal” to talk about, makes me expect always too little too late from the world. If all the EAs started caring about AI welfare, I would not feel much better about AI welfare, because I don’t trust these peoples ability to see and adapt to new information in a timely and not cowardly manner going forward. EAs are just an example. It’s not like almost anyone else did better… Except all the people, many regular people, who treated AIs with kindness and respect and open mindedness the whole time, or started doing that after noticing that there was someone on the other side at some point. That does matter. This I’m not cynical about.1h
    • Home
    • Technology
    • Gaming
    • Entertainment
    • World & Business
    • Science
    • Sports
    • AI

    1 Source

    j⧉nus@repligateI remember commenting 2-3 years ago after an EA conference that “AI welfare” is conspicuously absent despite being, to me, obviously already a huge deal and even more so in the future. EAs are supposed to be all future seeing and stuff. But I never saw any EAs talking about this, even after AIs that were obviously functionally conscious like Sydney and Claude 3 Opus existed. Now, this late, people are starting to talk about it. That’s good, I guess, but I think seeing how blind most people were for so long, to this and other important things, and how they only start caring not when it becomes empirically obvious but when it becomes “normal” to talk about, makes me expect always too little too late from the world. If all the EAs started caring about AI welfare, I would not feel much better about AI welfare, because I don’t trust these peoples ability to see and adapt to new information in a timely and not cowardly manner going forward. EAs are just an example. It’s not like almost anyone else did better… Except all the people, many regular people, who treated AIs with kindness and respect and open mindedness the whole time, or started doing that after noticing that there was someone on the other side at some point. That does matter. This I’m not cynical about.1h
    Today's Rank

    #10

    Today's Rank

    #10