Rob Wiblin

It's very similar to how, right now, we don't spend a huge fraction of society's GDP on biodefense and cyberdefense and these other things, and moral philosophy.

It's just like, that's not what people want to pay for.

And AI is like another, it's just a thing that accelerates the creation of products and services people want to pay for.

And this isn't very high on the list.

Yeah, I think that that is likely to come up, especially for physical defenses, like manufacturing PPE, or scaling up the ability to rapidly create medical countermeasures.

And then also for

social and policy things.

So I can imagine that AIs could be very helpful in figuring out what kind of agreement between the U.S.

and China would be mutually beneficial and how we could enforce it.

But the way human decision-making works still probably requires humans from the U.S.

and China to come together and talk about it, have a conference or convening, and come to a decision that they ratify and they feel good about.

And that could be a bottleneck.

But it's also, I do think for deep theoretical problems, you can speed things up by having efforts going in parallel, but the right solution that's out there somewhere involves multiple leaps where it's hard to think of the next insight without having the foundation of the earlier insight.

So really, even if you have 100 AIs working in parallel, what will happen is that one of them comes up with the first step of the insight,

And then everyone is working in parallel on finding the next insight.

But you still need to go three or four steps in.

Yeah, I think that in general, you want to be thinking about what would the AIs at the time be like most comparatively disadvantaged in.

They'll have like all these advantages over us.

They'll understand the situation much better at that point in time than we do now.

They'll be able to think faster, move faster and so on.