Dankrad Feist(@dankrad):Most people who claim that models aren't dangerous, or that the only way forward is max acceleration without brakes, probably believe this because they are even more scared of the alternative: If we admit that AI is dangerous then it needs to be regulated/controlled, and that means some insiders will have more powerful models (even more than is the case now) than everyone else. This dilemma isn't really new: Regulation almost always benefits the incumbents, which is bad for everyone else to some extent, but we do it because the alternative of regular food poisoning and planes crashing out of the sky is worse.

2026.09.21 11:37

Most people who claim that models aren't dangerous, or that the only way forward is max acceleration without brakes, probably believe this because they are even more scared of the alternative: If we admit that AI is dangerous then it needs to be regulated/controlled, and that means some insiders will have more powerful models (even more than is the case now) than everyone else. This dilemma isn't really new: Regulation almost always benefits the incumbents, which is bad for everyone else to some extent, but we do it because the alternative of regular food poisoning and planes crashing out of the sky is worse.

Paul Graham@paulg

2026.09.20 22:05

The reason so many people look for an ulterior motive for the AI labs asking to be regulated is that they don't grasp that models could be dangerous. But if you try assuming models are getting dangerous, or at least unpredictable, everything falls into place.