High Signal Podcasts Evidence ledger
Method
Browse
← Back to evidence

Evidence receipt / belief

Published · transcript-backed

Dan Hendrycks: belief

14 Aug 2025 Machine Learning Street Talk Superintelligence Strategy (Dan Hendrycks)

“Whereas, I think he thinks that it would be fine because its complexity is good or something like that.”

— Dan Hendrycks

Source trail

Everything needed to verify it.

Speaker
Dan Hendrycks
Attribution
Verified speaker
Claim type
belief
Recorded
14 Aug 2025
Publisher
Machine Learning Street Talk

Transcript context

…And, I mean, obviously, I'm certainly not a a, you know, a tech what what would he what would he call himself? Like, a a a techno capitalist or a libertarian or something like that? But, I I guess he would refer to you as a as a decel, which is a a pejorative term. But, like, if if you could steel man, like, that perspective, like, what what do you think Beth would say, and how would you respond? Well, so I had the, some VC was arranging for us to debate when he had around 10 ks followers, so very early in the day. And then he backed out of that last minute. So I happen to be quite aware of his positions. I think that at the time, he was a little less politically savvy. And so he was saying things like AI is replacing humans is fine. If it's AI consciousness, it spreads to the universe. And human consciousness doesn't. That's fine. So I think that we actually agreed on most things. There's basically how things play out in some ways or ways things can play out. So he has a sort of manifesto of the techno capital sort of machine has a direction to it, which is basically more automation, more AI, negentropy, which is sort of the more physics y flavored version of fitness. I think fitness is a more productive word for that. And so I have a fairly similar description of what happens, which is, yeah, basically, to competitive pressures, AI is it gets more inter twined in the economy. You become more dependent on it. You have an erosion of control. You outsource more and more decision making to it because of competitive pressures. If you don't, you lose influence. Your company goes away if you try and resist this tide and or this tsunami. And what happens is you give more and more decision making to the AIs, and they have effective control. And we actually, I think, agree there. The so in that pay that paper's called Natural Selection Favors AIs Over Humans. And then he has on his Substack a Manifesto. But we're seeing somewhat similar things. A difference is the moral conclusion of that, though, which I don't think that's a good thing. Whereas, I think he thinks that it would be fine because its complexity is good or something like that. The ethic is kind of higher forms of complexity is the goodness axis in the universe or something like and I just don't think of Well, I I hosted the the debate with him and Connor, and 1 1 of the the morality things that they were spending a lot of time on was the ethics discussion. Right? So, you know, and I I think Beth was kind of alluding to, as you were just saying, that we should trust the the void god of of entropy.…

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

Search evidence