Dan Hendrycks: prediction

Transcript context

…to fight And maybe even cybercrime, a kind of constant cat and That's And I expect that this game will keep continuing, and we won't get to a state where that is basically mostly managed in time, because the risk surface will keep evolving with agents that will present new things, we'll have to deal with those current cases that will create a substantial backlog, and we just won't have the adaptive capacity. And so consequently on both fronts for aligning recursion and aligning proto ASIs, we the geopolitical competitive pressures make it such that we're probably not going to solve either problem. So this is dark and going back to the beginning of our conversation, it's a reason to stand in front of the train, especially a particular train. So let's say that there's 1 train that's about chatbots and people having fun with chatbots and using them for brainstorming and whatever that are not mission critical and safety critical. Maybe it's fine. We just let people do that. And there are already some risks like around delusions that that Keshmir Hill wrote about in New York Times the other day, you probably saw. But the really safety critical things or the maximally safety critical things, if if things are as dark as you said, that is a reason to stand in front of that train right now and say, look, if we can't do alignment well on the refusals, etcetera, and the cause to harm causing harm to humans, foreseeable harm even to humans, that's a reason to say, hey, we gotta wait until we have a better solution here. If that takes 500 years, if it takes 5 years, like, in the safety critical stuff, isn't that a reason to to, you know, slow things down a bit?…

Stored transcript either side of the excerpt. The highlighted words are the published quote; the surrounding text is unedited source, never generated.