← Feed
@zzt@mas.to
Post #4447559
2026-08-08 11:48 UTC
@davidgerard@circumstances.run by the way, I’d like to highlight something from Green’s statement in the Washington Post because it’s worse in context and I want to make sure everyone has that context:
> Green, the YouTube star who did a paid post with ControlAI for his science channel, said in a statement that he wants to give his viewers a better understanding of this increasingly powerful technology by exposing them to a variety of views on AI. He pointed to recent unsponsored interviews on his personal YouTube channel that included critics of AI company hype, Sen. Sanders and one of the co-authors of “If Anyone Builds It, Everybody Dies.”
ControlAI is a wealthy political entity in the effective altruist sphere, and Green took their money in order to present their AI doom marketing as both science and as legitimate criticism of AI. given that AI doom presupposes the impending creation of an AI god and is the preferred framing of the AI companies themselves, it is neither science nor critique.
Replies (1)
-
@davidgerard@circumstances.run Green stated that he did this in order to present a variety of views on AI, but that’s not true. all of the interviews and AI videos on Green’s channel are in support of ControlAI’s AI doom narrative. there are no opposing viewpoints challenging the ridiculous and unscientific idea that godlike AI is a possible and impending risk to humanity.
all of the interviews Green has done have been with people who are either allied closely with ControlAI or are similarly tied up in Effective Altruism and AI doom (yes even Bernie, sorry about our boy).
the article is coy about this, but the “If Anyone Builds It, Everyone Dies” co-author Green interviewed was Nate Soares, a core TESCREAL personality who came up with the term “AI alignment”, now used in AI doom marketing by every EA organization.
the other co-author was Eliezer fucking Yudkowsky.
Open ##4447558