Claim and evidence Close ×
Ng's letter in The Batch of October 2023 states that the extinction arguments he heard were vague and nonspecific, reducing to "it could happen", and argues that such fears should not lead regulators to pass laws that impede progress. Copy claim link
Copy claim reference
Machine-checked, not reviewed by an editor Stated in source Supported
Supporting evidence: primary · 1 source
Date 2023-10 · publication Records dated 2023 → Role Articulation Register (kind of text) Nonfiction Scope and limits The letter reports the author's assessment of arguments he heard in conversation; it does not name the texts.
The evidence 02 primary source Supports the claim
The Batch, issue 220 (Halloween special): letter from Andrew Ng ↗ The Batch, DeepLearning.AI (deeplearning.ai) · 2023-10
Copy source reference
Cite the original source Cite the original document, not Selekoa. Check these details against it.
Copy APA
Download BibTeX Download RIS Download CSL-JSON
Source excerpt “When I try to evaluate how realistic these arguments are, I find them frustratingly vague and nonspecific. They boil down to “it could happen.” Location in source Letter, paragraph 3
How it was read Retrieved directly from the publisher
Machine-checked · 2026-10-31
Source details and check notes Authors Andrew Ng Version Retrieved for the candidate pack on 2026-10-29 (SHA-256 dc509a65f1d9ce0066190a01c82dad7c50c160bd9a31cbe560cfd84a6b23a997). Current web copy of the issue, dated Oct 25, 2023; the letter opens the issue. The cross-family check retrieved it again on 2026-10-31; the bytes differ, and the check compared the quoted passages. The page displays two dates, 25 and 26 October 2023 (cross-family check, item 95). Canonical address Open the canonical source ↗ Accessed 2026-10-29 Language English (en) Attribution Andrew Ng, “The Batch, issue 220 (Halloween special): letter from Andrew Ng”, 2023-10. Reuse No open redistribution licence asserted. Bibliographic metadata, editorial paraphrases and short attributed quotations (at most 50 words each). Recheck terms before wider redistribution. Check notes Candidate pack passage, arguments about catastrophic risk from advanced AI (research/risk-debate). The quotation (24 words) matched the text retrieved for the candidate pack on 2026-10-29. Matching ignored differences of whitespace, case, quotation marks, dashes and Unicode compatibility forms, so the source’s typography can differ. A cross-family machine check (2026-10-31, item 95) re-read the record’s source and found the quotation and stance supported. No human editorial review. primary source Supports the claim
The Batch, issue 220 (Halloween special): letter from Andrew Ng ↗ The Batch, DeepLearning.AI (deeplearning.ai) · 2023-10
Copy source reference
Cite the original source Cite the original document, not Selekoa. Check these details against it.
Copy APA
Download BibTeX Download RIS Download CSL-JSON
Source excerpt “Let’s make sure unsubstantiated fears don’t handicap that progress.” Location in source Letter, final paragraph
How it was read Retrieved directly from the publisher
Machine-checked · 2026-10-31
Source details and check notes Authors Andrew Ng Version Retrieved for the candidate pack on 2026-10-29 (SHA-256 dc509a65f1d9ce0066190a01c82dad7c50c160bd9a31cbe560cfd84a6b23a997). Current web copy of the issue, dated Oct 25, 2023; the letter opens the issue. The cross-family check retrieved it again on 2026-10-31; the bytes differ, and the check compared the quoted passages. The page displays two dates, 25 and 26 October 2023 (cross-family check, item 95). Canonical address Open the canonical source ↗ Accessed 2026-10-29 Language English (en) Attribution Andrew Ng, “The Batch, issue 220 (Halloween special): letter from Andrew Ng”, 2023-10. Reuse No open redistribution licence asserted. Bibliographic metadata, editorial paraphrases and short attributed quotations (at most 50 words each). Recheck terms before wider redistribution. Check notes Candidate pack passage, arguments about catastrophic risk from advanced AI (research/risk-debate). The quotation (9 words) matched the text retrieved for the candidate pack on 2026-10-29. Matching ignored differences of whitespace, case, quotation marks, dashes and Unicode compatibility forms, so the source’s typography can differ. A cross-family machine check (2026-10-31, item 95) re-read the record’s source and found the quotation and stance supported. No human editorial review. Status and meaning Editorial status. Not reviewed by an editor . An exploratory record that no editor has accepted. This status does not say whether a person has read any linked passage. Each evidence record above shows how it was checked.
Relation. A passage of the document meets the proposition’s criterion. The record documents what the text states, in its register (fiction and satire are labelled); it is not evidence that the proposition is true and implies no influence on or from another text.
Date. The page displays two dates, 25 and 26 October 2023 (cross-family check, item 95); the record keeps the month.
Record ID rd-r11-ng-2023-batch-issue-220