I think the content here is not controversial EXCEPT that it sounds way too doomerish. The only mention of positive effects of AI is "It could bring...major gains in living standards." It really should say "In the US, social security runs out in 2032. 65 million people die annually. AI progress is critical to solving these and other issues."
Full text of statement:
"1. AI may become radically more powerful over the next 10 years.
2. This could drive an unprecedented transformation of our economy, larger than the Industrial Revolution, but unfolding over a vastly shorter time frame. It could bring risks, including large-scale job displacement, as well as opportunities such as major gains in living standards.
3. Economists, policymakers and technology leaders must act now to understand the economics of transformative AI and to build the incentives, guardrails, and institutions needed to steer AI in a direction that complements humans and benefits society."
JohnFen•2h ago
> It really should say "In the US, social security runs out in 2032. 65 million people die annually. AI progress is critical to solving these and other issues."
No, it should not say that. That's posing speculation (AI progress is critical...) as if it were fact.
mchusma•2h ago
Full text of statement: "1. AI may become radically more powerful over the next 10 years.
2. This could drive an unprecedented transformation of our economy, larger than the Industrial Revolution, but unfolding over a vastly shorter time frame. It could bring risks, including large-scale job displacement, as well as opportunities such as major gains in living standards.
3. Economists, policymakers and technology leaders must act now to understand the economics of transformative AI and to build the incentives, guardrails, and institutions needed to steer AI in a direction that complements humans and benefits society."
JohnFen•2h ago
No, it should not say that. That's posing speculation (AI progress is critical...) as if it were fact.