Timnit Gebru (she/her).May 30, 2023
Its like a coordinated DDOS PR attack from these existential risk people and they're succeeding in making me constantly talk about them.
Show threadSasha Costanza-ChockMay 30, 2023

@timnitGebru maybe we should start a catchy label abbreviation to change the frame?

They are x-risk, we are

A-risk (actual risk?)
R-squared (real risk?)
R-harm (real harms?)
X-harms (eXisting harms?)

Show threadTimnit Gebru (she/her).May 30, 2023
@schock I love this.
Show threadSasha Costanza-ChockMay 30, 2023
@timnitGebru which one should we try? Or another snappy term that's better
Show threadSasha Costanza-ChockMay 30, 2023
@timnitGebru x-harm? As in eXisting harm?
Show threadSasha Costanza-ChockMay 30, 2023
@timnitGebru Reducing x-harm (actually eXisting harms) is a more powerful, ethical, and in the long run, effective approach than speculation about so-called x-risk.
Show threadGilberto FicaraJun 1, 2023

@schock @timnitGebru problem with long-termist crazyhats is that they don't actually believe in reducing x-harm

How do we fight that?
Or we don't engage them at all?

Show threadSasha Costanza-Chock
@zompetto @timnitGebru i think we just focus on developing a stronger alternate narrative
Jun 1, 2023 at 9:48pmWeb
Show threadmelanie ensign (she/her)Jun 2, 2023

@schock @zompetto @timnitGebru I love the thought behind the creative terminology. I do worry it’s too complicated for media & other potential messengers. The suggestion to developer a stronger counter narrative is smart.

The reality is existential threats are being used as a distraction so people don’t pay attention to the harms happening right now. The individuals behind this movement are hoping to neutralize oversight by the public & regulators with fear of the boogeyman. Fight, flight, or freeze — just don’t look at the man behind the curtain.