I just checked it out! I have mixed feelings about that series. I think the sentiment is probably directionally correct, but I found myself disagreeing with a lot of the claims and the framing. It reads to me like a non-expert summarizing expert views, and garbling them in the process. It didn’t seem very “AGI-pilled” either, for lack of a better term.
We don’t have many high quality takes on this stuff written out in public, which is a problem. I think the infohazard argument against this stuff is weak.
I just checked it out! I have mixed feelings about that series. I think the sentiment is probably directionally correct, but I found myself disagreeing with a lot of the claims and the framing. It reads to me like a non-expert summarizing expert views, and garbling them in the process. It didn’t seem very “AGI-pilled” either, for lack of a better term.
We don’t have many high quality takes on this stuff written out in public, which is a problem. I think the infohazard argument against this stuff is weak.
I’m glad you looked at it!