Center for AI Safety has deliberately opted for laconicism in its statement

[rUparaHmaN014]

Dan Hendrycks, executive director of the Center for AI Safety, told The New York Times that the brevity of the statement issued today by his organization—which does not suggest specific ways to mitigate the threat posed by AI—is deliberate and is ultimately intended to avoid potential disagreements. “We didn’t want to put a big menu of 30 potential interventions on the table,” Hendrycks says. “When that happens, the message gets diluted.”

Hendrycks refers to this statement as a kind of “coming out” by those figures in list of vietnam cell phone numbers the AI ​​field who are genuinely concerned about the potentially damaging development of this technology. “There is a misunderstanding, even within the AI ​​community itself, that there are only a handful of birds of ill omen,” he stresses. “However, the truth is that in private many people express their concerns about AI,” he adds.

The debate over the dangers of AI is anchored in hypothetical scenarios in which artificial intelligence systems rapidly increase their capabilities and then stop operating safely. Many experts warn that once AI systems reach a certain level of sophistication, it may become impossible to control their actions.