It seems like to me it would be more effective to focus on the object level aspects of their arguments rather than their weird lives? Their argument isn’t “look at my credentials, I’m an expert you must believe me” it’s that “ML research is largely math and science engineering, as AI gets better at math and science it can use that to speed up the cycle at which point something bad could happen”.

These Bay Area people dedicated their lives to AI risk often before AlexNet even showed deep learning could scale, by definition they are eccentric people.

At the same time, people like the AI 2027 guys (who that article speaks poorly of)… have been basically fully on the money so far.

Why that was a weird rabbit hole to go into. Thank you. I don't fall for this stuff though. It looks like a conspiracy theory like the world is flat, etc. That's enough internet for today.

This reminds me of during covid, when one of the biggest public proponents of vaccines in the UK was having an affair. The anti-vaxers then, instead of focusing on whether vaccines were helpful, focused on the affair. That allowed them to dismiss the pro-vaccine point of view without actually engaging on the merits of their argument.

You fall for this stuff? It's obviously not a sex cult