Or rather Samuel Hammond does. Tyler Cowen finds it interesting but not his view.

I put up a market, and then started looking. Click through to his post for the theses. I will be quoting a few of them in full, but not most of them.

I am not trying to be exact with these probabilities when the question calls for them, nor am I being super careful to make them consistent, so errors and adjustments are inevitable.

Section 1 is Oversight of AGI labs is prudent.

I do tend to say that.

---

Outline:

(00:37) Section 1 is Oversight of AGI labs is prudent.

(03:41) Section 2 is Most proposed ‘AI regulations’ are ill-conceived or premature.

(06:43) Section 3 claims AI progress is accelerating, not plateauing.

(09:25) Section 4 says open source is mostly a red herring.

(13:20) Section 5 claims accelerate versus decelerate is a false dichotomy.

(17:11) Section 6 is The AI wave is inevitable, superintelligence isn’t.

(18:50) Section 7 says technological transitions cause regime changes.

(20:44) Section 8 says institutional regime changes are packaged deals.

(24:16) Section 9 says dismissing AGI risks as ‘sci-fi’ is a failure of imagination.

(27:13) Finally, Section 10 says biology is an information technology.

(28:29) Tallying Up the Points

(28:52) Conclusion

---

First published:

Source:

---

Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO.