Talk:P(doom)
Appearance
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I came up with the "p(doom)" term - in 2009
[edit]As for "originating as an inside joke among AI researchers" - I came up with the term - as far as anyone can tell. I posted about it many times on LessWrong - which still has the posts archived. I was not an AI researcher. For the story, see the Roose, Kevin (2023-12-06) NYT article already linked as a reference in the article. TylerTim (talk) 02:54, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
- Here's a thread where I tell my story on Twitter/X: https://x.com/tim_tyler/status/1665571547111649286 TylerTim (talk) 02:56, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
- Here's a link to a relevant page on my <cough> machine intelligence web site: https://matchingpennies.com/pdoom/ TylerTim (talk) 03:00, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
Nate Silver's p(doom) is 5-10%
[edit]Nate Silver estimates p(doom) as 5-10% here: https://www.natesilver.net/p/its-time-to-come-to-grips-with-ai
Perhaps a regular contributor can add this to the list of prominent figure's p(doom) estimates. 71.161.118.179 (talk) 02:30, 28 January 2025 (UTC)