Kelsey—thanks for a very reasonable take on the pause, and some good questions.
IMO, the main benefit of the open letter isn’t so much implementing the pause itself, but simply raising public awareness of AI risks (which it succeeded in doing, remarkably well), and helping ordinary people realize that they they have the political, social, and cultural power to stand up to an increasingly reckless, arrogant, & profit-hungry AI industry.
In other words, the open letter is putting ‘AI safety’ inside the Overton window, as something that reputable citizens, politicians, pundits, and journalists can talk about, without being mocked or dismissed. That’s probably much more valuable than the 6-month pause itself could ever be.
Kelsey—thanks for a very reasonable take on the pause, and some good questions.
IMO, the main benefit of the open letter isn’t so much implementing the pause itself, but simply raising public awareness of AI risks (which it succeeded in doing, remarkably well), and helping ordinary people realize that they they have the political, social, and cultural power to stand up to an increasingly reckless, arrogant, & profit-hungry AI industry.
In other words, the open letter is putting ‘AI safety’ inside the Overton window, as something that reputable citizens, politicians, pundits, and journalists can talk about, without being mocked or dismissed. That’s probably much more valuable than the 6-month pause itself could ever be.