As someone with a background in philosophy: very few researchers seem to care about philosophy, unfortunately. (At least from the outside-looking-in: I don't actually work in the AI field, so perhaps all of the philosophically-inclined researchers simply don't talk much.) This has two major negative consequences:

1. Sloppy, unclear thinking. I see this constantly in discussions about AGI, superintelligence, etc. Unclear definitions, bad arguments, speculation of a future religion "worshipping" AIs, using sci-fi scenarios as somehow indicative of future progress of the field, on and on. It makes me long for the days of the early-mid 20th century, when scientists and technicians were both technical and philosophically-educated people.

2. The complete and utter lack of ethical knowledge, which in practice means AI companies adopt whatever flavor-of-the-day ideology is being touted as "ethical." Today, that seems to be DEI, although it seems to have peaked. Tomorrow, it'll be something else. The depth of "ethics of AI" or "AI safety" for most researchers seems to be entirely dependent on whatever society at large finds unpleasant.

I have been kicking around the idea of starting a blog/Substack about the philosophy of AI and technology, mostly because of this exact issue. My only hesitation is that I'm unclear of what the monetization model would be – and I already have enough work to do and bills to pay. If anyone would find this interesting, please let me know.