IDK man, feels like you are fixated on one particular thing he said (and your interpretation of what he meant by it), as part of a longer conversation on the pod about the analogy. I’m not trying to pick a fight here, just wanted to clarify that he’s not making the mistake you think he’s making.

I listened to it. Also, I run org (@intelligence.org) that he founded, so I’m quite familiar with the argument he’s making. This interview didn’t result in the best exposition of the analogy in question, but I can assure you he isn’t making the mistake you think he is.

How is he anthropomorphizing natural selection? One can think of evolution as an optimization process, and the analogy is between that optimization process and the one used to train AI systems.

It is by no means a "nearly unanimous view" that LLMs are a dead end among AI experts. Also the argument for future very powerful AI systems being an extinction threat does not depend on those systems being LLM based.

(Totally above board. Sharing full-length episodes is one of the benefits of being a subscriber.)

Some context:
Many of the chapters start with parables/dialogues that are illustrative of the topic of that chapter, but the content of that type only makes up ~25 pages of the 200+ page book.

Well, he didn't sign that pause letter, so that's not relevant.

Seems like you are referencing his TIME op-ed. I think without the context of the piece, what you said is pretty misleading.

FWIW, that's not actually what he said.

I love a good take from a skeptic; it’s important for healthy discourse. Levy, to me, seems like he’s being more cynical than skeptical here, which I think is a shame.

We gonna get a review from you? Would love to hear your thoughts on the substance of the book, if you do give it a read.

Isn’t this piece itself an American journalist giving them a platform?

Agree. FWIW, this is not the authors position either.