I think “labs” has the connotation of mad scientists and somebody creating something that escapes the lab, so has some “good” connotations for AI safety comms.
Interesting point! I’d be OK with people calling them “evil mad scientist labs,” but I still think the generic “lab” has more of a positive, harmless connotation than this negative one.
I’d also be more sympathetic to calling them “labs” if (1) we had actual regulations around them or (2) they were government projects. Biosafety and nuclear weapons labs have a healthy reputation for being dangerous and unfriendly, in a way “computer labs” do not. Also, private companies may have biosafety containment labs on premises, and the people working within them are labworkers/scientists, but we call the companies pharmaceutical companies (or “Big Pharma”), not “frontier medicine labs”.
Also also if any startup tried to make a nuclear weapons lab they would be shut down immediately and all the founders would be arrested. [citation needed]
Fwiw, I would have predicted that labs would lead to more positive evaluations overall, including higher evaluations of responsibility and safety. But I don’t think people’s intuitions are very reliable about such cases.
I think “labs” has the connotation of mad scientists and somebody creating something that escapes the lab, so has some “good” connotations for AI safety comms.
Of course, depending on the context and audience.
Interesting point! I’d be OK with people calling them “evil mad scientist labs,” but I still think the generic “lab” has more of a positive, harmless connotation than this negative one.
I’d also be more sympathetic to calling them “labs” if (1) we had actual regulations around them or (2) they were government projects. Biosafety and nuclear weapons labs have a healthy reputation for being dangerous and unfriendly, in a way “computer labs” do not. Also, private companies may have biosafety containment labs on premises, and the people working within them are labworkers/scientists, but we call the companies pharmaceutical companies (or “Big Pharma”), not “frontier medicine labs”.
Also also if any startup tried to make a nuclear weapons lab they would be shut down immediately and all the founders would be arrested. [citation needed]
Seems testable!
Fwiw, I would have predicted that labs would lead to more positive evaluations overall, including higher evaluations of responsibility and safety. But I don’t think people’s intuitions are very reliable about such cases.