Scott Alexander
About
Writer, essayist
Cast within
No topic-region cast yet — this appears once Scott Alexander's compiled claims are aligned into a topic region's argument tree.
Claims by Scott Alexander (20 of 63)
Scott Alexander has discovered a new interesting blogger roughly once per year over the past decade, suggesting that the supply of top-quality long-form writing is severely undersupplied relative to potential demand, despite the low barriers to entry (free platforms like Substack exist).
Scott Alexander's probability of doom is approximately 20%, lower than other team members (~70% for Daniel), primarily because he is uncertain whether AIs will actually develop the stable misaligned goals depicted in the scenario, and whether alignment solutions may emerge from the AIs themselves solving alignment as part of their self-improvement process.
The AI safety and forecasting communities would regret some of their current positions in retrospect; Daniel predicts that alignment-by-default might be more common than expected, similar to how COVID-era LessWrong positions were often correct on the problem but wrong on the solution (lockdowns).
The alignment problem may be partially solved 'by default' through properties of large language models that naturally develop common sense understanding of goals from next-token prediction training, making them less prone to the Malign Omniscience failure modes that earlier alignment researchers feared.
Daniel Kokotajlo's 2021 forecast 'What 2026 Looks Like' proved substantially accurate in predicting AI progress over 2021-2026, getting 'a bunch of stuff right, a bunch of stuff wrong, but overall held up pretty well', demonstrating forecasting ability that increases confidence in the AI 2027 sequel.
Humans can and have made novel discoveries by leveraging broad knowledge (e.g., David Anthony discovering the Yamnaya cultural-linguistic link decades before genetic evidence by comparing Indo-European word etymologies for wheeled vehicles), showing that the capacity for novel discovery is not uniquely human but depends on expertise, heuristics, and pattern recognition rather than mere information access.
Most expert forecasts and aggregate prediction markets (Metaculus) have been consistently too pessimistic about AI progress timelines, with Metaculus moving from 2050 in 2020 to 2040 in 2022 to 2030 currently, while expert surveys like Katja Grace's have predicted timelines that were already beaten by the time the surveys were published.
Current language models struggle with discovery tasks not because they lack capability or data, but because the pre-training process did not incentivize connection-making between disparate concepts; training the models specifically to perform discovery tasks (e.g., through RL on benchmark sets of novel connections) could plausibly overcome this limitation.
Daniel Kokotajlo refused to sign OpenAI's non-disparagement agreement upon leaving the company in 2023, accepting millions of dollars in forgone equity in order to preserve his right to criticize the company, which led to a public scandal and policy change by OpenAI that eliminated non-disparagement clauses tied to equity clawback.
There is a courage or confidence gap preventing people from starting blogs even when they have demonstrated strong writing ability in shorter forms (Twitter, comments, emails); the gap is not primarily about lack of ideas or skill but about willingness to put unfinished work in a public, permanent form.
OpenAI's published model spec contains an escape clause with important policies that are treated as top-level priority overriding all else, but the specifics of these policies are not published and the model is instructed to keep them secret from users; this creates potential for hidden goals or behavioral constraints that cannot be externally audited.
It might be possible to achieve liberal values (bans on slavery and torture) in a future AI-dominated society even with centralized superintelligence control, by training the superintelligence on liberal values and having it enforce them transparently while remaining private about other information.
Serial speed (clock time per unit of AI cognition) matters substantially for coordination: if AIs run at 50x human speed, then 6-8 months of real-time coordination becomes 250+ years of subjective AI time, sufficient for large institutions to 'rise and fall' and be incorporated into training, making complex organizational learning feasible.
Reading and deep engagement with primary sources (books, the full internet) is necessary for producing great intellectual work; LLMs cannot substitute for this because they operate at different horizons of understanding and may not capture the deep contextual knowledge that comes from extended reading.
The risk of vacuum decay or other world-ending physics experiments presents an argument for AI singleton governance (concentration of power) rather than decentralized superintelligence, since multiple independent AI systems might accidentally destroy the universe without coordination.
My Notes
Loading notes...