Many Experts Say We Shouldn’t Worry About Superintelligent AI. They’re Wrong
A magazine article by Stuart Russell, IEEE Spectrum, dated 8 October 2019. The IEEE Spectrum page dates the article 08 Oct 2019.
- 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 Stuart Russell.
- Dates
- No date claim recorded yet. The source record gives the publication date as 2019-10-08.
- Exact source
- Many Experts Say We Shouldn’t Worry About Superintelligent AI. They’re Wrong IEEE Spectrum (spectrum.ieee.org) · published 2019-10-08 · Retrieved for the candidate pack on 2026-10-29 (SHA-256 44432d3c30826cf27e47a02b24bf2bb9afea8db05e619f33870d279f69c833f8). current IEEE Spectrum page dated 08 Oct 2019, based on a chapter of Human Compatible (Viking, 2019); printed in the October 2019 issue as "It’s Not Too Soon to Be Wary of AI", which was not compared. 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 →3 records 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 · 2
Explicit references in this document. Citation is neither agreement nor influence.
- The Seven Deadly Sins of Predicting the Future of AIRussell's article of 8 October 2019 replies to Brooks, whom it names, quoting the sentence of Brooks's post of 7 September 2017 on a program smart enough to subvert human society.2019-10-08 · publication · Stated in source · Supported Inspect claim & evidence ↗Brooks, The Seven Deadly Sins of Predicting the Future of AI (2017): document page →
- Thinking Does Not Imply SubjugatingRussell's article of 8 October 2019 replies to Pinker, whom it names, quoting wording that appears in Pinker's Edge response of 2015.2019-10-08 · publication · Stated in source · Supported Inspect claim & evidence ↗Pinker, Thinking Does Not Imply Subjugating (Edge, 2015): document page →
Articulates · 2
Propositions whose criterion a passage of this document meets. The record says what the text states, in its register; it is not evidence that the proposition is true.
- Orthogonality of intelligence and goalsRussell's article of 8 October 2019 argues, citing Hume, that a general-purpose intelligent system could be given more or less any objective, and that improving a system's competence does not make it reject an objective it has been given.2019-10-08 · publication · Stated in source · Supported Inspect claim & evidence ↗Orthogonality of intelligence and goals: propositions page →
- Instrumental convergenceRussell's article of 8 October 2019 argues that a machine will have goals such as self-preservation and resource acquisition as subgoals of any objective it is given, and will resist being switched off because it would otherwise fail in its objective.2019-10-08 · publication · Stated in source · Supported Inspect claim & evidence ↗Instrumental convergence: propositions page →
Contests · 1
Propositions a passage of this document disputes, or a premise they depend on.
- Advanced AI can be kept under control by designRussell's article of 8 October 2019 argues that those who hold the risk from AI to be negligible have not explained why superintelligent AI systems will necessarily remain under human control.2019-10-08 · publication · Stated in source · Supported Inspect claim & evidence ↗Advanced AI can be kept under control by design: 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.