Executive summary: The PauseAI protest movement aims to raise awareness of AI safety issues, but the efficacy and impact of advocating for an AI pause remain highly uncertain.
Key points:
There are many open questions around whether pausing AI progress would reduce existential risk, or exacerbate it through hardware overhang. The balance of considerations is unclear.
Pause advocacy could potentially polarize the issue, harm existing AI safety efforts, and negatively impact the reputation of the field. But it may also expand the Overton window and provide social license for useful regulation. The impact is uncertain.
The effectiveness of social movements and advocacy is debatable. AI safety issues may be fundamentally different from other causes.
Participating in protests may be costly for individuals. The time spent may not be an efficient use of the community’s resources.
Applying consequentialist reasoning to advocacy has drawbacks. But choices must still be made about whether to participate.
The core motivation seems to be communicating the severity of AI risk. “Pause AI” may or may not be the optimal message for this goal.
This comment was auto-generated by the EA Forum Team. Feel free to point out issues with this summary by replying to the comment, andcontact us if you have feedback.
Executive summary: The PauseAI protest movement aims to raise awareness of AI safety issues, but the efficacy and impact of advocating for an AI pause remain highly uncertain.
Key points:
There are many open questions around whether pausing AI progress would reduce existential risk, or exacerbate it through hardware overhang. The balance of considerations is unclear.
Pause advocacy could potentially polarize the issue, harm existing AI safety efforts, and negatively impact the reputation of the field. But it may also expand the Overton window and provide social license for useful regulation. The impact is uncertain.
The effectiveness of social movements and advocacy is debatable. AI safety issues may be fundamentally different from other causes.
Participating in protests may be costly for individuals. The time spent may not be an efficient use of the community’s resources.
Applying consequentialist reasoning to advocacy has drawbacks. But choices must still be made about whether to participate.
The core motivation seems to be communicating the severity of AI risk. “Pause AI” may or may not be the optimal message for this goal.
This comment was auto-generated by the EA Forum Team. Feel free to point out issues with this summary by replying to the comment, and contact us if you have feedback.