I mean if doesn't help that Eliezer Yudkowsky spent the first decade of his public life zealously spreading the gospel of the AI singularity as the solution to all mankind's problems. And then later did a 180 degree pivot to AI singularity as the apocalypse with equal zeal and certainty.
One could use his flip flop to invalidate his new position. But one of those two positions is true. And if they guy who spent the most energy on position 1 changes his mind, that is worth paying attention to. His second position is likely a more informed, and true, position.
I don’t see why one of these two positions must be true. And just because he spent a lot of energy trying to convince others of his obsession doesn’t really convince me he has greater insight the future or how the complex consequences unfold.
That's totally true, I have no issues with a changing opinion over time. The problem is expressing both opinions with 100% certainty and not updating priors to consider that your new position could also be completely wrong.
