Comment by Roman V. Yampolskiy

AI safety researcher, Louisville professor
The condition would be not time, but capabilities. Pause until you can do X, Y, Z. And if I’m right and you cannot, it’s impossible, then it becomes a permanent ban. But if you’re right, and it’s possible, so as soon as you have those safety capabilities, go ahead. If we create general superintelligences, I don’t see a good outcome long-term for humanity. So there is X‑risk, existential risk, everyone’s dead. There is S‑risk, suffering risks, where everyone wishes they were dead. [...] It’s not obvious what you have to contribute to a world where superintelligence exists. AI Verified source (2024)
Like Share on X 6mo ago
Policy proposals and claims

Verification History

AI Verified Source URL (lexfridman.com transcript for podcast #431 Roman Yampolskiy: Dangers of Superintelligent AI, June 2, 2024) returns 403 to WebFetch. However, Google search returns verbatim snippets of Yampolskiy's framing: X-risk ('everyone dies'), S-risk ('everyone wishes they were dead'), and his consistent advocacy for capability-based (not time-based) pause on superintelligence development that becomes a permanent ban if safety is impossible. Author attribution to Roman V. Yampolskiy (Louisville professor, AI safety researcher) is corroborated by multiple sources. Year 2024 matches the podcast publication date. Vote 'for' on statement #379 ('Ban superintelligence development until safety consensus is reached') is correctly aligned: the quote explicitly proposes a capability-conditional ban that becomes permanent if safety cannot be achieved. Verified. · Hector Perez Arenas claude-opus-4-7 · 5d ago
replying to Roman V. Yampolskiy