Oly Sourbut

in the medium to long term, automation will just win out eventually in most cases, because it's always gonna be more efficient to have the tireless, doesn't get sick AI systems that can just kind of run 24 seven.

But that of course comes with all kinds of costs.

There are some really important decisions to be made by individuals, by groups, by societies,

about where we actually go next and how it is that we're directing that.

If we can, in the meantime, enable better decisions to be made by individuals, by societies, then hopefully, even if it's the case that everything eventually gets handed off to AI, we'll be in a better position to trust that and to know that it's going to be trustworthy.

And as a society, kind of endorse that and move in that direction in a way that we think is wise.

If your system has systematic blind spots, then you might expect that it could perhaps surreptitiously or even inadvertently kind of surface a biased summary of the situation.

Now that could lead you to systematically biased decisions.

Far too often, things are just sort of chaotic and confusing.

People fail to coordinate.

People fail to understand the consequences of their actions.

They even fail to understand what their options even are in the first place.

And each of these problems we think is remediable to some extent with support from tools, many of which would incorporate AI.

Sure.

Yeah, I'm Ollie.

I work at the Future of Life Foundation.

One way to think about FLF is it's kind of like a little spin out from FLI.

We take a slightly different strategy.

We're looking at being a kind of accelerator or I think an accelerator is the right term for projects that might be neglected in making the future go well.

And especially we've got a big focus on AI right now, as everyone has.