Scott criticizes an article downplaying AI risks in favor of mundane technologies, arguing this represents misplaced caution given AI's potential existential threat.
Longer summary
Scott Alexander critiques a Financial Times article that argues simple technologies like barbed wire are often more transformative than complex ones like AI. While agreeing that mundane innovations can be important, Scott argues this shouldn't dismiss concerns about AI risks. He introduces the concept of local vs. global caution, suggesting that dismissing AI risks as unlikely is the wrong kind of caution given the potential stakes. He points out the severe underfunding of AI safety research compared to trivial pursuits, arguing that society's apathy towards AI risks is not cautious skepticism but dangerous insanity.
Shorter summary