Existential Risk? I Don't Get It!
An essay by Andrew Ng, The Batch, dated 7 June 2023. Date printed on the page and in its datePublished metadata.
- Issued by
- No issuing record yet. A missing record is a gap in coverage.
- Authors credited
- No authorship claim recorded yet. The source record lists Andrew Ng.
- Dates
- No date claim recorded yet. The source record gives the publication date as 2023-06-07.
- Exact source
- Existential Risk? I Don't Get It! The Batch, DeepLearning.AI (deeplearning.ai) · published 2023-06-07 · Retrieved for the candidate pack on 2026-10-29 (SHA-256 78aa4053ee0d0cef37204af39681c085dbbc2075b026c81a73adeedf2ac29ce9). Current web copy of the letter in The Batch, dated Jun 07, 2023 on the page. The cross-family check retrieved it again on 2026-10-31; the bytes differ, and the check compared the quoted passages.
Appears in
- Arguments about catastrophic risk from advanced AI →1 record on this document
Versions
No other versions of this document are recorded. The evidence applies to the source version listed above. Other versions, such as a preprint, working paper or journal publication, are not identified or substituted.
Documentary relations
Each relation is listed separately. Citing, crediting and reporting the use of a method are different acts, and none of them shows agreement or influence by itself.
Cites · 1
Explicit references in this document. Citation is neither agreement nor influence.
Contests · 1
Propositions a passage of this document disputes, or a premise they depend on.
- Risk of extinction or comparable catastropheNg's letter in The Batch of 7 June 2023, responding to the CAIS statement, states that he struggles to see how AI could pose any meaningful risk of human extinction, lists the risks he does recognise, and says he is speaking with people who might have a thoughtful perspective on how AI creates such a risk.2023-06-07 · publication · Stated in source · Supported Inspect claim & evidence ↗Risk of extinction or comparable catastrophe: propositions page →
Not recorded for this document: cited by · explicitly credits · reports using a method from · method reported as used by · applies parts of · parts applied by · discusses · reports evaluation of. A missing record does not show that the relation does not exist.