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.

Added to korrents 2 Sept 2026 · How quotes work · Something wrong? Tell us

Where this collides

• Cannot both be true

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

  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 human being is not an AGI: we lack a huge amount of knowledge and rely on continual learning instead, so continual learning is what superintelligence should mean. ISIlya Sutskever25 Nov 2025AI alignment
• A model that looks smarter and better-behaved while getting better at hiding unwanted actions is the scary combination for AI safety. ZMZvi Mowshowitz9 Sept 2026AI alignment
• A player coach manages a smaller team while building together with it, rather than sitting in an ivory tower doing performance reviews and alignment meetings. RGRon Goldin9 Jun 2026AI alignment
• A superintelligence needs no consciousness, emotions or malice to be dangerous; a goal system slightly misaligned with ours is enough. ÉTÉmile P. Torres24 Oct 2017AI alignment
• A validated theory of intelligence may be necessary for achieving genuine AI alignment. KKKevin Kelly17 Aug 2026AI alignment

On the map

Open the map on its own page