flâneur

Mottes and Baileys in AI discourse — LessWrong

lesswrong.com · 4,515 words · saved by 1 readers

This post kinda necessarily needs to touch multiple political topics at once. Please, everyone, be careful. If it looks like you haven't read the LessWrong Political Prerequisites, I'm more likely than usual to delete your comments. I think some people are (rightly) worried about a few flavors of Motte and Baily-ing with the IABIED discourse, and more recently, with the Superintelligence Statement. With If Anyone Builds It: "Sure, the motte is 'If any company or group, anywhere on the planet, builds an artificial superintelligence using anything remotely like current techniques, based on anything remotely like the present understanding of AI, then everyone, everywhere on Earth, will die.'". But I feel like I'm being set up for a bailies like: "and... Eliezer's frame on how to think about the problem is exactly right" [1] Or, longer term, not necessarily from the MIRI folk: "Let's build a giant regulatory apparatus that not only stifles technological progress but also is too opaque and

x Mottes and Baileys in AI discourse — LessWrong AI Frontpage 51 Mottes and Baileys in AI discourse by Raemon 28th Oct 2025 11 min read 8 51 This post kinda necessarily needs to touch multiple political topics at once. Please, everyone, be careful . If it looks like you haven't read the LessWrong Political Prerequisites , I'm more likely than usual to delete your comments. I think some people are (rightly) worried about a few flavors of Motte and Baily-ing with the IABIED discourse, and more recently, with the Superintelligence Statement . With If Anyone Builds It : "Sure, the motte is 'If any

related reading