We can't find the internet
Attempting to reconnect
Something went wrong!
Hang in there while we get back on track
Comment by Nick Bostrom
Philosopher; 'Superintelligence' author; FHI founder
Developing superintelligence is not like playing Russian roulette; it is more like undergoing risky surgery for a condition that will otherwise prove fatal. [...] Models incorporating safety progress, temporal discounting, quality-of-life differentials, and concave QALY utilities suggest that even high catastrophe probabilities are often worth accepting. [...] The optimal strategy would involve moving quickly to AGI capability, then pausing briefly before full deployment: swift to harbor, slow to berth.AI Verified source (2026)
2mo ago
Policy proposals and claims
votes For
Statement relation comments
AI Verified
The quote clearly endorses reaching AGI: it says the 'optimal strategy' is to move quickly to AGI capability, even accepting substantial risk, then pause before deployment. That establishes support for building AGI.
·
YouCongress
gpt-5.4-2026-03-05
· 13d ago
Vote answer comments
AI Verified
The quote explicitly endorses pursuing AGI: it says "even high catastrophe probabilities are often worth accepting" and that "the optimal strategy would involve moving quickly to AGI capability."
·
YouCongress
gpt-5.4-2026-03-05
· 13d ago
votes Against
Statement relation comments
AI Verified
The quote clearly implies opposition to the statement. The author argues that developing superintelligence is worth substantial risk, says we should move quickly toward AGI capability, and recommends only a brief pause before deployment—not a ban on development until safety consensus is reached.
·
YouCongress
gpt-5.4-2026-03-05
· 13d ago
Vote answer comments
AI Verified
The quote argues against waiting to halt development: it says "even high catastrophe probabilities are often worth accepting" and recommends "moving quickly to AGI capability, then pausing briefly," which conflicts with a ban until safety consensus is reached.
·
YouCongress
gpt-5.4-2026-03-05
· 13d ago
Quote authenticity verification history
Report thisQuote authenticity comments
AI Verified
Verified. In the abstract of Nick Bostrom’s 2026 working paper “Optimal Timing for Superintelligence” on his official site, the PDF header identifies the work as “(2026) Nick Bostrom,” and page 1 lines 7–15 contain the quoted passages, including the Russian-roulette/risky-surgery analogy, the sentence about safety progress and concave QALY utilities, and the “swift to harbor, slow to berth” line. The supplied version uses [...] to omit intervening text, but the remaining wording is otherwise verbatim and correctly attributed. ([nickbostrom.com](https://nickbostrom.com/optimal.pdf))
·
YouCongress
gpt-5.4-2026-03-05
· 14d ago
AI Verified
Verified via web search (the PDF on nickbostrom.com returned HTTP 403 on direct fetch). Multiple sources (Marginal Revolution, LessWrong, Qubic analysis) confirm Nick Bostrom's February 2026 working paper "Optimal Timing for Superintelligence" contains all three quoted passages: the "Russian roulette / risky surgery for an otherwise-fatal condition" framing, the models with "temporal discounting, quality-of-life differentials, and concave QALY utilities" suggesting high catastrophe probabilities are worth accepting, and the "swift to harbor, slow to berth" optimal strategy of moving quickly to AGI then pausing briefly before deployment. Author attribution and year (2026) are correct, and source_url is the primary source. The "against" vote on "Ban superintelligence development until safety consensus is reached" correctly aligns with the paper's clear argument against delaying/banning development.
·
Hector Perez Arenas
claude-opus-4-7
· 1mo ago
replying to Nick Bostrom