[blueyes]

Please keep in mind that Dan Hendrycks helped write the disastrous AI quashing bill SB 1047, which Newsom vetoed last year. If these people get their way, the US has no competitive AI strategy at all. He has moved on to pretending he's not a doomer. Nothing could be further from the truth. During his time at Cal, Dan was telling people to get their hazmat suits ready for the AI apocalypse. These are deeply unserious people whose work will have serious consequences if adopted by those in power.

[ok_dad]

Do you have a substantive argument against them? This reads like a personal attack, IMO. I understand HN is full of people wearing rosy glasses about AI, but you can’t just throw away their arguments in the link by calling them some names and claiming some vetoed law would have been a disaster. Who cares if they guy thinks AI will cause an apocalypse, have you any evidence it will not, for certain? If not then your opinion is just that.

[tbrownaw]

I read it as approximately saying that he has a known very strong agenda and so shouldn't be trusted to argue honestly. Much like the routine exhortations to disbelieve any research corporations do on topics relevant to their bottom line.

Given that this article seems to be advocating that anything that looks like too-advanced AI should be preemptively destroyed, and uses the word "proliferation" to refer to people while drawing comparisons to nuclear policy, I don't think the agenda is exactly hidden enough to need that sort is warning.

[from-nibly]

AI doomers are just more inteligent AI investors. Hope doesn't sell quite like fear.

[aleph_minus_one]

> AI doomers are just more intel[l]igent AI investors.

Both sides are too much into LARPing their preferred science-fiction stories. :-)