Caveats:
1. It's 101 pages (do # of pages correlate with aggressive effort to be authoritative, e.g. 'state of the world' pdfs.
2. This appears to come from the AGI existential threat doomer camp - does it even have any validity? At first glance, it appears both absurd in terms of presumptive risks, and also AI generated (this is biased to the pages I'd read)
3. MLCommons has a more scholastic approach to ranking models on potential harms, curious on reception to all approaches (pros vs cons of each)
rooftopzen|7 months ago