AI systems should be understood as something between airplanes and humans, since it can no longer be assumed they lack humanlike motivations.

Added to korrents 1 Sept 2026 · How quotes work · Something wrong? Tell us

Where this collides

• Cannot both be true

  The idea that AI will decide to kill humanity is a category error: it is math and code, built and controlled by people, not a living thing shaped by evolution.

  Andreessen says treating AI as something that could decide to kill humanity is a category error, since it is math and code built by people rather than a living thing shaped by evolution. Alexander says these systems sit between airplanes and humans and that it can no longer be assumed they lack humanlike motivations. The category is exactly what is in dispute.

Shared subject first, then similar wording. They may agree or disagree.

• A functioning institution is a rare exception and never grows by itself: it was assembled by a founder with good judgement. SBSamo Burja9 Jul 2018aviation
• AI's energy use is an easier end-use to decarbonize than aviation. ZHZeke Hausfather5 Aug 2026aviation
• Airplanes are already almost as energy-efficient as they could possibly be, so no redesign will radically improve their efficiency. DMDavid MacKay3 Nov 2008aviation
• Because software is the cheapest part of a system to change, other disciplines lean on it to paper over their own physical problems, and that reliance has killed people. HWHillel Wayne20 Jan 2021aviation
• Boeing's decline began when its management moved away from the factory and the engineers stopped running it. AVAustin Vernon31 Aug 2021aviation

On the map

Open the map on its own page