📜

"Pivotal Act" Intentions: Negative Consequences and Fallacious Arguments

📅 2022
policy development
🔵 Rare
#ai

📖 Description

**tl;dr:** I know a bunch of EA/rationality-adjacent people who argue -- sometimes jokingly and sometimes seriously -- that the only way or best way to reduce existential risk is to enable an "aligned" AGI development team to forcibly (even if nonviolently) shut down all other AGI projects, using safe AGI. I find that the arguments for this conclusion are flawed, and that the conclusion itself causes harm to institutions who espouse it. Fortunately (according to me), successful AI labs do not seem to espouse this "pivotal act" philosophy.

📊 Game Impacts

Variable Change Condition
Research +5 Always
Vibey Doom +5 Always
Ethics Risk -5 Always

💭 Reactions

🔬 Safety Researcher Reaction: ⚠️ Placeholder - Needs Real Quote
"This is a significant contribution to alignment research"
📰 Media Reaction: ⚠️ Placeholder - Needs Real Quote
"Discussed in AI safety community"
💡 Found a Real Quote? Suggest it here

🔗 Sources

🏷️ Event Metadata

Think this event's metadata could be improved? Suggest changes to category, rarity, tags, game impacts, or p(doom) effects.

📁 Category Policy Development → Suggest different category
⭐ Rarity 🔵 Rare → Suggest different rarity
🏷️ Tags (1) ai → Suggest tag changes
📊 Game Impacts (3) 3 variable changes → Suggest impact changes
☢️ p(Doom) Impact No direct impact → Suggest p(doom) change
📝 General Metadata Year, description, reactions → Comprehensive review

🤝 Found an Issue?

This event data is sourced from the pdoom-data repository. If you notice errors or want to suggest improvements:

GitHub Issue (Preferred) 📧 Email (No GitHub)
← Back to All Events