Raw LLM Responses

I'm not sure I buy the value of "screaming and shouting" as they put it. Rob touches on it but activism is maladapted to positive change. I don't think the "catchy slogan" is the main problem there. Even if you "succeed" in making AI Safety a high profile issue, using the slow, easily co-opted/regulatory-captured apparatus of the state to drive the exact right change in this area, which is 1. Fast-changing 2. Very technical 3. Easily prone to caricature/misinformation. This kind of effort seems just as, if not more, likely to have a detrimental effect on the project of AI safety, through populism, counter factions, culture war, and bad associations (think of the damage SBF did to the brand of Effective Altruism). And even if you solve that nigh-unsolvable problem... that's just one nation. You could make all this painstaking against-all-odds effort in the US and if China's path is unchanged, congratulations, you have not lowered p(doom) one tenth of one percent. Now, it's true you can forget about the government part and just say the point is to pressure private firms and develop private watchdog agencies into action. To which I say, sure, but you don't need high profile "screaming and yelling" style activism to achieve this. You need people who are in "high places" as Rob refers to, or people who are influential in AI spheres, or people in unelected political leadership positions, or CEOs or Boards of top firms, to be well informed of the completely rational and reasonable concerns people are raising. This is a much more straightforward path to positive change that uses the powers that be much more to their strengths. And the more rational and level-headed the movement issue, eschewing "yelling and screaming", the more the reasonable people--the people who have a chance of making meaningful progress in this difficult field--will pay attention, obviating the need for loud, incendiary rhetoric anyway.