Doom Debates

Devin Elliot is a former pro snowboarder turned software engineer who has logged thousands of hours building AI systems. His P(Doom) is a flat ⚫. He argues that worrying about an AI takeover is as irrational as fearing your car will sprout wings and fly away. We spar over the hard limits of current models: Devin insists LLMs are hitting a wall, relying entirely on external software “wrappers” to feign intelligence. I push back, arguing that raw models are already demonstrating native reasoning and algorithmic capabilities. Devin also argues for decentralization by claiming that nuclear proliferation is safer than centralized control. We end on a massive timeline split: I see superintelligence in a decade, while he believes we’re a thousand years away from being able to “grow” computers that are truly intelligence. Timestamps 00:00:00 Episode Preview00:01:03 Intro: Snowboarder to Coder00:03:30 "I Do Not Have a P(Doom)"00:06:47 Nuclear Proliferation & Centralized Control00:10:11 The "Spotify Quality" House Analogy00:17:15 Ideal Geopolitics: Decentralized Power00:25:22 Why AI Can't "Fly Away"00:28:20 The Long Addition Test: Native or Tool?00:38:26 Is Non-Determinism a Feature or a Bug?00:52:01 The Impossibility of Mind Uploading00:57:46 "Growing" Computers from Cells01:02:52 Timelines: 10 Years vs. 1,000 Years01:11:40 "Plastic Bag Ghosts" & Builder Intuition01:13:17 Summary of the Debate01:15:30 Closing Thoughts Links Devin’s Twitter — https://x.com/devinjelliot --- Doom Debates’ Mission is to raise mainstream awareness of imminent extinction from AGI and build the social infrastructure for high-quality debate. Support the mission by subscribing to my Substack at DoomDebates.com and to youtube.com/@DoomDebates , or to really take things to the next level: Donate 🙏 Get full access to Doom Debates at lironshapira.substack.com/subscribe

Dr. Michael Timothy Bennett, Ph.D, is an award-winning young researcher who has developed a new formal framework for understanding intelligence. He has a TINY P(Doom) because he claims superintelligence will be resource-constrained and tend toward cooperation. In this lively debate, I stress-test Michael’s framework and debate whether its theorized constraints will actually hold back superintelligent AI. Timestamps * 00:00 Trailer * 01:41 Introducing Michael Timothy Bennett * 04:33 What’s Your P(Doom)?™ * 10:51 Michael’s Thesis on Intelligence: “Abstraction Layers”, “Adaptation”, “Resource Efficiency” * 25:36 Debate: Is Einstein Smarter Than a Rock? * 39:07 “Embodiment”: Michael’s Unconventional Computation Theory vs Standard Computation * 48:28 “W-Maxing”: Michael’s Intelligence Framework vs. a Goal-Oriented Framework * 59:47 Debating AI Doom * 1:09:49 Debating Instrumental Convergence * 1:24:00 Where Do You Get Off The Doom Train™ — Identifying The Cruxes of Disagreement * 1:44:13 Debating AGI Timelines * 1:49:10 Final Recap Links Michael’s website — https://michaeltimothybennett.com Michael’s Twitter — https://x.com/MiTiBennett Michael’s latest paper, “How To Build Conscious Machines” — https://osf.io/preprints/thesiscommons/wehmg_v1?view_only Doom Debates' Mission is to raise mainstream awareness of imminent extinction from AGI and build the social infrastructure for high-quality debate. Support the mission by subscribing to my Substack at DoomDebates.com and to youtube.com/@DoomDebates , or to really take things to the next level: Donate 🙏 Get full access to Doom Debates at lironshapira.substack.com/subscribe

My guest today achieved something EXTREMELY rare and impressive: Coming onto my show with an AI optimist position, then admitting he hadn’t thought of my counterarguments before, and updating his beliefs in realtime! Also, he won the 2013 Nobel Prize in computational biology. I’m thrilled that Prof. Levitt understands the value of raising awareness about imminent extinction risk from superintelligent AI, and the value of debate as a tool to uncover the truth — the dual missions of Doom Debates! Timestamps 0:00 — Trailer 1:18 — Introducing Michael Levitt 4:20 — The Evolution of Computing and AI 12:42 — Measuring Intelligence: Humans vs. AI 23:11 — The AI Doom Argument: Steering the Future 25:01 — Optimism, Pessimism, and Other Existential Risks 34:15 — What’s Your P(Doom)™ 36:16 — Warning Shots and Global Regulation 55:28 — Comparing AI Risk to Pandemics and Nuclear War 1:01:49 — Wrap-Up 1:06:11 — Outro + New AI safety resource Show Notes Michael Levitt’s Twitter — https://x.com/MLevitt_NP2013 -- Get full access to Doom Debates at lironshapira.substack.com/subscribe

Michael Ellsberg, son of the legendary Pentagon Papers leaker Daniel Ellsberg, joins me to discuss the chilling parallels between his father’s nuclear war warnings and today’s race to AGI. We discuss Michael’s 99% probability of doom, his personal experience being “obsoleted” by AI, and the urgent moral duty for insiders to blow the whistle on AI’s outsize risks. Timestamps 0:00 Intro 1:29 Introducing Michael Ellsberg, His Father Daniel Ellsberg, and The Pentagon Papers 5:49 Vietnam War Parallels to AI: Lies and Escalation 25:23 The Doomsday Machine & Nuclear Insanity 48:49 Mutually Assured Destruction vs. Superintelligence Risk 55:10 Evolutionary Dynamics: Replicators and the End of the “Dream Time” 1:10:17 What’s Your P(doom)?™ 1:14:49 Debating P(Doom) Disagreements 1:26:18 AI Unemployment Doom 1:39:14 Doom Psychology: How to Cope with Existential Risk 1:50:56 The “Joyless Singularity”: Aligned AI Might Still Freeze Humanity 2:09:00 A Call to Action for AI Insiders Show Notes: Michael Ellsberg’s website — https://www.ellsberg.com/ Michael’s Twitter — https://x.com/MichaelEllsberg Daniel Ellsberg’s website — https://www.ellsberg.net/ The upcoming book, “Truth and Consequence” — https://geni.us/truthandconsequence Michael’s AI-related substack “Mammalian Wetware” — https://mammalianwetware.substack.com/ Daniel’s debate with Bill Kristol in the run-up to the Iraq war — https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HyvsDR3xnAg -- Doom Debates’ Mission is to raise mainstream awareness of imminent extinction from AGI and build the social infrastructure for high-quality debate. Support the mission by subscribing to my Substack at DoomDebates.com and to youtube.com/@DoomDebates , or to really take things to the next level: Donate 🙏 Get full access to Doom Debates at lironshapira.substack.com/subscribe

Today's Debate: Should we ban the development of artificial superintelligence until scientists agree it is safe and controllable? Arguing FOR banning superintelligence until there’s a scientific consensus that it’ll be done safely and controllably and with strong public buy-in: Max Tegmark. He is an MIT professor, bestselling author, and co-founder of the Future of Life Institute whose research has focused on artificial intelligence for the past 8 years. Arguing AGAINST banning superintelligent AI development: Dean Ball. He is a Senior Fellow at the Foundation for American Innovation who served as a Senior Policy Advisor at the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy under President Trump, where he helped craft America’s AI Action Plan. Two of the leading voices on AI policy engaged in high-quality, high-stakes debate for the benefit of the public! This is why I got into the podcast game — because I believe debate is an essential tool for humanity to reckon with the creation of superhuman thinking machines. Timestamps 0:00 - Episode Preview 1:41 - Introducing The Debate 3:38 - Max Tegmark’s Opening Statement 5:20 - Dean Ball’s Opening Statement 9:01 - Designing an “FDA for AI” and Safety Standards 21:10 - Liability, Tail Risk, and Biosecurity 29:11 - Incremental Regulation, Timelines, and AI Capabilities 54:01 - Max’s Nightmare Scenario 57:36 - The Risks of Recursive Self‑Improvement 1:08:24 - What’s Your P(Doom)?™ 1:13:42 - National Security, China, and the AI Race 1:32:35 - Closing Statements 1:44:00 - Post‑Debate Recap and Call to Action Show Notes Statement on Superintelligence released by Max’s organization, the Future of Life Institute — https://superintelligence-statement.org/ Dean’s reaction to the Statement on Superintelligence — https://x.com/deanwball/status/1980975802570174831 America’s AI Action Plan — https://www.whitehouse.gov/articles/2025/07/white-house-unveils-americas-ai-action-plan/ “A Definition of AGI” by Dan Hendrycks, Max Tegmark, et. al. — https://www.agidefinition.ai/ Max Tegmark’s Twitter — https://x.com/tegmark Dean Ball’s Twitter — https://x.com/deanwball Get full access to Doom Debates at lironshapira.substack.com/subscribe

Max Harms and Jeremy Gillen are current and former MIRI researchers who both see superintelligent AI as an imminent extinction threat. But they disagree on whether it’s worthwhile to try to aim for obedient, “corrigible” AI as a singular target for current alignment efforts. Max thinks corrigibility is the most plausible path to build ASI without losing control and dying, while Jeremy is skeptical that this research path will yield better superintelligent AI behavior on a sufficiently early try. By listening to this debate, you’ll find out if AI corrigibility is a relatively promising effort that might prevent imminent human extinction, or an over-optimistic pipe dream. Timestamps 0:00 — Episode Preview 1:18 — Debate Kickoff 3:22 — What is Corrigibility? 9:57 — Why Corrigibility Matters 11:41 — What’s Your P(Doom)™ 16:10 — Max’s Case for Corrigibility 19:28 — Jeremy’s Case Against Corrigibility 21:57 — Max’s Mainline AI Scenario 28:51 — 4 Strategies: Alignment, Control, Corrigibility, Don’t Build It 37:00 — Corrigibility vs HHH (”Helpful, Harmless, Honest”) 44:43 — Asimov’s 3 Laws of Robotics 52:05 — Is Corrigibility a Coherent Concept? 1:03:32 — Corrigibility vs Shutdown-ability 1:09:59 — CAST: Corrigibility as Singular Target, Near Misses, Iterations 1:20:18 — Debating if Max is Over-Optimistic 1:34:06 — Debating if Corrigibility is the Best Target 1:38:57 — Would Max Work for Anthropic? 1:41:26 — Max’s Modest Hopes 1:58:00 — Max’s New Book: Red Heart 2:16:08 — Outro Show Notes Max’s book Red Heart — https://www.amazon.com/Red-Heart-Max-Harms/dp/108822119X Learn more about CAST: Corrigibility as Singular Target — https://www.lesswrong.com/s/KfCjeconYRdFbMxsy/p/NQK8KHSrZRF5erTba Max’s Twitter — https://x.com/raelifin Jeremy’s Twitter — https://x.com/jeremygillen1 --- Doom Debates’ Mission is to raise mainstream awareness of imminent extinction from AGI and build the social infrastructure for high-quality debate. Support the mission by subscribing to my Substack at DoomDebates.com and to youtube.com/@DoomDebates , or to really take things to the next level: Donate 🙏 Get full access to Doom Debates at lironshapira.substack.com/subscribe

Holly Elmore leads protests against frontier AI labs, and that work has strained some of her closest relationships in the AI-safety community.She says AI safety insiders care more about their reputation in tech circles than actually lowering AI x-risk. This is our full conversation from my “If Anyone Builds It, Everyone Dies” unofficial launch party livestream on Sept 16, 2025. Timestamps 0:00 Intro 1:06 Holly’s Background and The Current Activities of PauseAI US 4:41 The Circular Firing Squad Problem of AI Safety 7:23 Why the AI Safety Community Resists Public Advocacy 11:37 Breaking with Former Allies at AI Labs 13:00 LessWrong’s reaction to Eliezer’s public turn Show Notes PauseAI US — https://pauseai-us.org International PauseAI — https://pauseai.info Holly’s Twitter — https://x.com/ilex_ulmus Holly’s Substack: https://substack.com/@hollyelmore Holly’s post covering how AI isn’t another “technology”: https://hollyelmore.substack.com/p/the-technology-bucket-error Related Episodes Holly and I dive into the rationalist community’s failure to rally behind a cause: https://lironshapira.substack.com/p/lesswrong-circular-firing-squad The full IABED livestream: https://lironshapira.substack.com/p/if-anyone-builds-it-everyone-dies-party Get full access to Doom Debates at lironshapira.substack.com/subscribe

Sparks fly in the finale of my series with ex-MIRI researcher Tsvi Benson-Tilsen as we debate his AGI timelines.Tsvi is a champion of using germline engineering to create smarter humans who can solve AI alignment. I support the approach, even though I’m skeptical it’ll gain much traction before AGI arrives. Timestamps 0:00 Debate Preview0:57 Tsvi’s AGI Timeline Prediction 3:03 The Least Impressive Task AI Cannot Do In 2 years6:13 Proposed Task: Solve Cantor’s Theorem From Scratch 8:20 AI Has Limitations Related to Sample Complexity 11:41 We Need Clear Goalposts for Better AGI Predictions 13:19 Counterargument: LLMs May Not Be a Path to AGI16:01 Is Tsvi Setting a High Bar for Progress Towards AGI? 19:17 AI Models Are Missing A Spark of Creativity28:17 Liron’s “Black Box” AGI Test 32:09 Are We Going to Enter an AI Winter? 35:09 Who Is Being Overconfident? 42:11 If AI Makes Progress on Benchmarks, Would Tsvi Shorten His Timeline? 50:34 Recap & Tsvi’s Research Show Notes Learn more about Tsvi’s organization, the Berkeley Genomics Project — https://berkeleygenomics.org Doom Debates’ Mission is to raise mainstream awareness of imminent extinction from AGI and build the social infrastructure for high-quality debate. Support the mission by subscribing to my Substack at DoomDebates.com and to youtube.com/@DoomDebates , or to really take things to the next level: Donate 🙏 Get full access to Doom Debates at lironshapira.substack.com/subscribe

Today I’m sharing my AI doom interview on Donal O’Doherty’s podcast. I lay out the case for having a 50% p(doom). Then Donal plays devil’s advocate and tees up every major objection the accelerationists throw at doomers. See if the anti-doom arguments hold up, or if the AI boosters are just serving sophisticated cope. Timestamps 0:00 — Introduction & Liron’s Background 1:29 — Liron’s Worldview: 50% Chance of AI Annihilation 4:03 — Rationalists, Effective Altruists, & AI Developers 5:49 — Major Sources of AI Risk 8:25 — The Alignment Problem 10:08 — AGI Timelines 16:37 — Will We Face an Intelligence Explosion? 29:29 — Debunking AI Doom Counterarguments 1:03:16 — Regulation, Policy, and Surviving The Future With AI Show Notes If you liked this episode, subscribe to the Collective Wisdom Podcast for more deeply researched AI interviews: https://www.youtube.com/@DonalODoherty Transcript Introduction & Liron’s Background Donal O’Doherty 00:00:00 Today I’m speaking with Liron Shapira. Liron is an investor, he’s an entrepreneur, he’s a rationalist, and he also has a popular podcast called Doom Debates, where he debates some of the greatest minds from different fields on the potential of AI risk. Liron considers himself a doomer, which means he worries that artificial intelligence, if it gets to superintelligence level, could threaten the integrity of the world and the human species. Donal 00:00:24 Enjoy my conversation with Liron Shapira. Donal 00:00:30 Liron, welcome. So let’s just begin. Will you tell us a little bit about yourself and your background, please? I will have introduced you, but I just want everyone to know a bit about you. Liron Shapira 00:00:39 Hey, I’m Liron Shapira. I’m the host of Doom Debates, which is a YouTube show and podcast where I bring in luminaries on all sides of the AI doom argument. Liron 00:00:49 People who think we are doomed, people who think we’re not doomed, and we hash it out. We try to figure out whether we’re doomed. I myself am a longtime AI doomer. I started reading Yudkowsky in 2007, so it’s been 18 years for me being worried about doom from artificial intelligence. My background is I’m a computer science bachelor’s from UC Berkeley. Liron 00:01:10 I’ve worked as a software engineer and an entrepreneur. I’ve done a Y Combinator startup, so I love tech. I’m deep in tech. I’m deep in computer science, and I’m deep into believing the AI doom argument. I don’t see how we’re going to survive building superintelligent AI. And so I’m happy to talk to anybody who will listen. So thank you for having me on, Donal. Donal 00:01:27 It’s an absolute pleasure. Liron’s Worldview: 50% Chance of AI Annihilation Donal 00:01:29 Okay, so a lot of people where I come from won’t be familiar with doomism or what a doomer is. So will you just talk through, and I’m very interested in this for personal reasons as well, your epistemic and philosophical inspirations here. How did you reach these conclusions? Liron 00:01:45 So I often call myself a Yudkowskian, in reference to Eliezer Yudkowsky, because I agree with 95% of what he writes, the Less Wrong corpus. I don’t expect everybody to get up to speed with it because it really takes a thousand hours to absorb it all. I don’t think that it’s essential to spend those thousand hours. Liron 00:02:02 I think that it is something that you can get in a soundbite, not a soundbite, but in a one-hour long interview or whatever. So yeah, I think you mentioned epistemic roots or whatever, right? So I am a Bayesian, meaning I think you can put probabilities on things the way prediction markets are doing. Liron 00:02:16 You know, they ask, oh, what’s the chance that this war is going to end? Or this war is going to start, right? What’s the chance that this is going to happen in this sports game? And some people will tell you, you can’t reason like that. Whereas prediction markets are like, well, the market says there’s a 70% chance, and what do you know? It happens 70% of the time. So is that what you’re getting at when you talk about my epistemics? Donal 00:02:35 Yeah, exactly. Yeah. And I guess I’m very curious as well about, so what Yudkowsky does is he conducts thought experiments. Because obviously some things can’t be tested, we know they might be true, but they can’t be tested in experiments. Donal 00:02:49 So I’m just curious about the role of philosophical thought experiments or maybe trans-science approaches, in terms of testing questions that we can’t actually conduct experiments on. Liron 00:03:00 Oh, got it. Yeah. I mean this idea of what can and can’t be tested. I mean, tests are nice, but they’re not the only way to do science and to do productive reasoning. Liron 00:03:10 There are times when you just have to do your best without a perfect test. You know, a recent example was the James Webb Space Telescope, right? It’s the successor to the Hubble Space Telescope. It worked really well, but it had to get into this really difficult orbit. This ver

Tsvi Benson-Tilsen spent seven years tackling the alignment problem at the Machine Intelligence Research Institute (MIRI). Now he delivers a sobering verdict: humanity has made “basically 0%” progress towards solving it. Tsvi unpacks foundational MIRI research insights like timeless decision theory and corrigibility , which expose just how little humanity actually knows about controlling superintelligence. These theoretical alignment concepts help us peer into the future, revealing the non-obvious, structural laws of “intellidynamics” that will ultimately determine our fate. Time to learn some of MIRI’s greatest hits. P.S. I also have a separate interview with Tsvi about his research into human augmentation: Watch here! Timestamps 0:00 — Episode Highlights 0:49 — Humanity Has Made 0% Progress on AI Alignment 1:56 — MIRI’s Greatest Hits: Reflective Probability Theory, Logical Uncertainty, Reflective Stability 6:56 — Why Superintelligence is So Hard to Align: Self-Modification 8:54 — AI Will Become a Utility Maximizer (Reflective Stability) 12:26 — The Effect of an “Ontological Crisis” on AI 14:41 — Why Modern AI Will Not Be ‘Aligned By Default’ 18:49 — Debate: Have LLMs Solved the “Ontological Crisis” Problem? 25:56 — MIRI Alignment Greatest Hit: Timeless Decision Theory 35:17 — MIRI Alignment Greatest Hit: Corrigibility 37:53 — No Known Solution for Corrigible and Reflectively Stable Superintelligence 39:58 — Recap Show Notes Stay tuned for part 3 of my interview with Tsvi where we debate AGI timelines! Learn more about Tsvi’s organization, the Berkeley Genomics Project: https://berkeleygenomics.org Watch part 1 of my interview with Tsvi: Transcript Episode Highlights Tsvi Benson-Tilsen 00:00:00 If humans really f*cked up, when we try to reach into the AI and correct it, the AI does not want humans to modify the core aspects of what it values. Liron Shapira 00:00:09 This concept is very deep, very important. It’s almost MIRI in a nutshell. I feel like MIRI’s whole research program is noticing: hey, when we run the AI, we’re probably going to get a bunch of generations of thrashing. But that’s probably only after we’re all dead and things didn’t happen the way we wanted. I feel like that is what MIRI is trying to tell the world. Meanwhile, the world is like, “la la la, LLMs, reinforcement learning—it’s all good, it’s working great. Alignment by default.” Tsvi 00:00:34 Yeah, that’s certainly how I view it. Humanity Has Made 0% Progress on AI Alignment Liron Shapira 00:00:46 All right. I want to move on to talk about your MIRI research. I have a lot of respect for MIRI. A lot of viewers of the show appreciate MIRI’s contributions. I think it has made real major contributions in my opinion—most are on the side of showing how hard the alignment problem is , which is a great contribution. I think it worked to show that. My question for you is: having been at MIRI for seven and a half years, how are we doing on theories of AI alignment? Tsvi Benson-Tilsen 00:01:10 I can’t speak with 100% authority because I’m not necessarily up to date on everything and there are lots of researchers and lots of controversy. But from my perspective, we are basically at 0% —at zero percent done figuring it out. Which is somewhat grim. Basically, there’s a bunch of fundamental challenges, and we don’t know how to grapple with these challenges. Furthermore, it’s sort of sociologically difficult to even put our attention towards grappling with those challenges, because they’re weirder problems—more pre-paradigmatic. It’s harder to coordinate multiple people to work on the same thing productively. It’s also harder to get funding for super blue-sky research. And the problems themselves are just slippery . MIRI Alignment Greatest Hits: Reflective Probability Theory, Logical Uncertainty, Reflective Stability Liron 00:01:55 Okay, well, you were there for seven years, so how did you try to get us past zero? Tsvi 00:02:00 Well, I would sort of vaguely (or coarsely) break up my time working at MIRI into two chunks. The first chunk is research programs that were pre-existing when I started: reflective probability theory and reflective decision theory . Basically, we were trying to understand the mathematical foundations of a mind that is reflecting on itself—thinking about itself and potentially modifying itself, changing itself. We wanted to think about a mind doing that, and then try to get some sort of fulcrum for understanding anything that’s stable about this mind. Something we could say about what this mind is doing and how it makes decisions—like how it decides how to affect the world—and have our description of the mind be stable even as the mind is changing in potentially radical ways. Liron 00:02:46 Great. Okay. Let me try to translate some of that for the viewers here. So, MIRI has been the premier organization studying intelligence dynamics , and Eliezer Yudkowsky—especially—people on social media like to dunk on him and say he has

I’m excited to share my recent AI doom interview with Eben Pagan, better known to many by his pen name David DeAngelo! For an entire generation of men, ‘David DeAngelo’ was the authority on dating—and his work transformed my approach to courtship back in the day. Now the roles reverse, as I teach Eben about a very different game, one where the survival of our entire species is at stake. In this interview, we cover the expert consensus on AI extinction, my dead-simple two-question framework for understanding the threat, why there’s no “off switch” for superintelligence, and why we desperately need international coordination before it’s too late. Timestamps 0:00 - Episode Preview 1:05 - How Liron Got Doom-Pilled 2:55 - Why There’s a 50% Chance of Doom by 2050 4:52 - What AI CEOs Actually Believe 8:14 - What “Doom” Actually Means 10:02 - The Next Species is Coming 12:41 - The Baby Dragon Fallacy 14:41 - The 2-Question Framework for AI Extinction 18:38 - AI Doesn’t Need to Hate You to Kill You 21:05 - “Computronium”: The End Game 29:51 - 3 Reasons There’s No Superintelligence “Off Switch” 36:22 - Answering ‘What Is Intelligence?” 43:24 - We Need Global Coordination Show Notes Eben has become a world-class business trainer and someone who follows the AI discourse closely. I highly recommend subscribing to his podcast for excellent interviews & actionable AI tips: @METAMIND_AI --- Doom Debates’ Mission is to raise mainstream awareness of imminent extinction from AGI and build the social infrastructure for high-quality debate. Support the mission by subscribing to my Substack at DoomDebates.com and to youtube.com/@DoomDebates , or to really take things to the next level: Donate 🙏 Get full access to Doom Debates at lironshapira.substack.com/subscribe

Former Machine Intelligence Research Institute (MIRI) researcher Tsvi Benson-Tilsen is championing an audacious path to prevent AI doom: engineering smarter humans to tackle AI alignment. I consider this one of the few genuinely viable alignment solutions, and Tsvi is at the forefront of the effort. After seven years at MIRI, he co-founded the Berkeley Genomics Project to advance the human germline engineering approach. In this episode, Tsvi lays out how to lower P(doom), arguing we must stop AGI development and stigmatize it like gain-of-function virus research. We cover his AGI timelines, the mechanics of genomic intelligence enhancement, and whether super-babies can arrive fast enough to save us. I’ll be releasing my full interview with Tsvi in 3 parts. Stay tuned for part 2 next week! Timestamps 0:00 Episode Preview & Introducing Tsvi Benson-Tilsen 1:56 What’s Your P(Doom)™ 4:18 Tsvi’s AGI Timeline Prediction 6:16 What’s Missing from Current AI Systems 10:05 The State of AI Alignment Research: 0% Progress 11:29 The Case for PauseAI 15:16 Debate on Shaming AGI Developers 25:37 Why Human Germline Engineering 31:37 Enhancing Intelligence: Chromosome Vs. Sperm Vs. Egg Selection 37:58 Pushing the Limits: Head Size, Height, Etc. 40:05 What About Human Cloning? 43:24 The End-to-End Plan for Germline Engineering 45:45 Will Germline Engineering Be Fast Enough? 48:28 Outro: How to Support Tsvi’s Work Show Notes Tsvi’s organization, the Berkeley Genomics Project — https://berkeleygenomics.org If you’re interested to connect with Tsvi about germline engineering, you can reach out to him at [email protected]. --- Doom Debates’ Mission is to raise mainstream awareness of imminent extinction from AGI and build the social infrastructure for high-quality debate. Support the mission by subscribing to my Substack at DoomDebates.com and to youtube.com/@DoomDebates , or to really take things to the next level: Donate 🙏 Get full access to Doom Debates at lironshapira.substack.com/subscribe

Today I'm sharing my interview on Robert Wright's Nonzero Podcast where we unpack Eliezer Yudkowsky's AI doom arguments from his bestselling book, "If Anyone Builds It, Everyone Dies." Bob is an exceptionally thoughtful interviewer who asks sharp questions and pushes me to defend the Yudkowskian position, leading to a rich exploration of the AI doom perspective. I highly recommend getting a premium subscription to his podcast: 0:00 Episode Preview 2:43 Being a "Stochastic Parrot" for Eliezer Yudkowsky 5:38 Yudkowsky's Book: "If Anyone Builds It, Everyone Dies" 9:38 AI Has NEVER Been Aligned 12:46 Liron Explains "Intellidynamics" 15:05 Natural Selection Leads to Maladaptive Behaviors — AI Misalignment Foreshadowing 29:02 We Summon AI Without Knowing How to Tame It 32:03 The "First Try" Problem of AI Alignment 37:00 Headroom Above Human Capability 40:37 The PauseAI Movement: The Silent Majority 47:35 Going into Overtime Get full access to Doom Debates at lironshapira.substack.com/subscribe

Today I’m taking a rare break from AI doom to cover the dumbest kind of doom humanity has ever created for itself: climate change. We’re talking about a problem that costs less than $2 billion per year to solve. For context, that’s what the US spent on COVID relief every 7 hours during the pandemic. Bill Gates could literally solve this himself. My guest Andrew Song runs Make Sunsets , which launches weather balloons filled with sulfur dioxide (SO₂) into the stratosphere to reflect sunlight and cool the planet. It’s the same mechanism volcanoes use—Mount Pinatubo cooled Earth by 0.5°C for a year in 1991. The physics is solid, the cost is trivial, and the coordination problem is nonexistent. So why aren’t we doing it? Because people are squeamish about “playing God” with the atmosphere, even while we’re building superintelligent AI. Because environmentalists would rather scold you into turning off your lights than support a solution that actually works. This conversation changed how I think about climate change. I went from viewing it as this intractable coordination problem to realizing it’s basically already solved—we’re just LARPing that it’s hard! 🙈 If you care about orders of magnitude, this episode will blow your mind. And if you feel guilty about your carbon footprint: you can offset an entire year of typical American energy usage for about 15 cents. Yes, cents. Timestamps * 00:00:00 - Introducing Andrew Song, Cofounder of Make Sunsets * 00:03:08 - Why the company is called “Make Sunsets” * 00:06:16 - What’s Your P(Doom)™ From Climate Change * 00:10:24 - Explaining geoengineering and solar radiation management * 00:16:01 - The SO₂ dial we can turn * 00:22:00 - Where to get SO₂ (gas supply stores, sourcing from oil) * 00:28:44 - Cost calculation: Just $1-2 billion per year * 00:34:15 - “If everyone paid $3 per year” * 00:42:38 - Counterarguments: moral hazard, termination shock * 00:44:21 - Being an energy hog is totally fine * 00:52:16 - What motivated Andrew (his kids, Luke Iseman) * 00:59:09 - “The stupidest problem humanity has created” * 01:11:26 - Offsetting CO₂ from OpenAI’s Stargate * 01:13:38 - Playing God is good Show Notes Make Sunsets * Website: https://makesunsets.com * Tax-deductible donations (US): https://givebutter.com/makesunsets People Mentioned * Casey Handmer: https://caseyhandmer.wordpress.com/ * Emmett Shear: https://twitter.com/eshear * Palmer Luckey: https://twitter.com/PalmerLuckey Resources Referenced * Book: Termination Shock by Neal Stephenson * Book: The Rational Optimist by Matt Ridley * Book: Enlightenment Now by Steven Pinker * Harvard SCoPEx project (the Bill Gates-funded project that got blocked) * Climeworks (direct air capture company): https://climeworks.com Data/Monitoring * NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration): https://www.noaa.gov * ESA Sentinel-5P TROPOMI satellite data --- Doom Debates’ Mission is to raise mainstream awareness of imminent extinction from AGI and build the social infrastructure for high-quality debate. Support the mission by subscribing to my Substack at DoomDebates.com and to youtube.com/@DoomDebates , or to really take things to the next level: Donate 🙏 Get full access to Doom Debates at lironshapira.substack.com/subscribe

I’ve been puzzled by David Deutsch’s AI claims for years. Today I finally had the chance to hash it out: Brett Hall , one of the foremost educators of David Deutsch’s ideas around epistemology & science, was brave enough to debate me! Brett has been immersed in Deutsch’s philosophy since 1997 and teaches it on his Theory of Knowledge podcast , which has been praised by tech luminary Naval Ravikant. He agrees with Deutsch on 99.99% of issues, especially the dismissal of AI as an existential threat. In this debate, I stress-test the Deutschian worldview, and along the way we unpack our diverging views on epistemology, the orthogonality thesis, and pessimism vs optimism. Timestamps 0:00 — Debate preview & introducing Brett Hall 4:24 — Brett’s opening statement on techno-optimism 13:44 — What’s Your P(Doom)?™ 15:43 — We debate the merits of Bayesian probabilities 20:13 — Would Brett sign the AI risk statement? 24:44 — Liron declares his “damn good reason” for AI oversight 35:54 — Debate milestone: We identify our crux of disagreement! 37:29 — Prediction vs prophecy 44:28 — The David Deutsch CAPTCHA challenge 1:00:41 — What makes humans special? 1:15:16 — Reacting to David Deutsch’s recent statements on AGI 1:24:04 — Debating what makes humans special 1:40:25 — Brett reacts to Roger Penrose’s AI claims 1:48:13 — Debating the orthogonality thesis 1:56:34 — The powerful AI data center hypothetical 2:03:10 — “It is a dumb tool, easily thwarted” 2:12:18 — Clash of worldviews: goal-driven vs problem-solving 2:25:05 — Ideological Turing test: We summarize each other’s positions 2:30:44 — Are doomers just pessimists? Show Notes Brett’s website — https://www.bretthall.org Brett’s Twitter — https://x.com/TokTeacher The Deutsch Files by Brett Hall and Naval Ravikant * https://nav.al/deutsch-files-i * https://nav.al/deutsch-files-ii * https://nav.al/deutsch-files-iii * https://nav.al/deutsch-files-iv Books: * The Fabric of Reality by David Deutsch * The Beginning of Infinity by David Deutsch * Superintelligence by Nick Bostrom * If Anyone Builds It, Everyone Dies by Eliezer Yudkowsky --- Doom Debates’ Mission is to raise mainstream awareness of imminent extinction from AGI and build the social infrastructure for high-quality debate. Support the mission by subscribing to my Substack at DoomDebates.com and to youtube.com/@DoomDebates , or to really take things to the next level: Donate 🙏 Get full access to Doom Debates at lironshapira.substack.com/subscribe

We took Eliezer Yudkowsky and Nate Soares’s new book, If Anyone Builds It, Everyone Dies , on the streets to see what regular people think. Do people think that artificial intelligence is a serious existential risk? Are they open to considering the argument before it’s too late? Are they hostile to the idea? Are they totally uninterested? Watch this episode to see the full spectrum of reactions from a representative slice of America! --- Doom Debates’ Mission is to raise mainstream awareness of imminent extinction from AGI and build the social infrastructure for high-quality debate. Support the mission by subscribing to my Substack at DoomDebates.com and to youtube.com/@DoomDebates , or to really take things to the next level: Donate 🙏 Get full access to Doom Debates at lironshapira.substack.com/subscribe

Welcome to the Doom Debates + Wes Roth + Dylan Curious crossover episode! Wes & Dylan’s host a popular YouTube AI news show that’s better than mainstream media. They interview thought leaders like Prof. Nick Bostrom, Dr. Mike Israetel — and now, yours truly! This episode is Part 2, where Wes & Dylan come on Doom Debates to break down the latest AI news. In Part 1, I went on Wes & Dylan’s channel to talk about my AI doom worries: The only reasonable move is to subscribe to both channels and watch both parts! Timestamps 00:00 — Cold open 00:45 — Introducing Wes & Dylan & hearing their AI YouTuber origin stories 05:38 — What’s Your P(Doom)? ™ 10:30 — Living with high P(doom) 12:10 — AI News Roundup: If Anyone Builds It, Everyone Dies Reactions 17:02 — AI Redlines at the UN & risk of AGI authoritarianism 26:56 — Robot ‘violence test’ 29:20 — Anthropic gets honest about job loss impact 32:43 — AGI hunger strikes, the rationale for Anthropic protests 41:24 — Liron explains his proposal for a safer future, treaty & enforcement debate 49:23 — US Government officials ignore scientists and use “catastrophists” pejorative 55:59 — Experts’ p(doom) predictions 59:41 — Wes gives his take on AI safety warnings 1:02:04 — Wrap-up, Subscribe to Wes Roth and Dylan Curious Show Notes Wes & Dylans’s channel — https://www.youtube.com/wesroth If Anyone Builds It, Everyone Dies by Eliezer Yudkowsky and Nate Soares — https://ifanyonebuildsit.com --- Doom Debates’ Mission is to raise mainstream awareness of imminent extinction from AGI and build the social infrastructure for high-quality debate. Support the mission by subscribing to my Substack at DoomDebates.com and to youtube.com/@DoomDebates , or to really take things to the next level: Donate 🙏 Get full access to Doom Debates at lironshapira.substack.com/subscribe

I’m excited to announce the launch of Doom Hut , the official Doom Debates merch store! This isn’t just another merch drop. It’s a way to spread an urgent message that humanity faces an imminent risk from superintelligent AI, and we need to build common knowledge about it now. What We’re Offering The Doom Hut is the premiere source of “high P(doom) fashion.” We’ve got t-shirts in men’s and women’s styles, tall tees, tote bags, and hats that keep both the sun and the doom out of your eyes. Our signature items are P(doom) pins. Whether your probability of doom is less than 10%, greater than 25%, or anywhere in between, you can represent your assessment with pride. Our shirts feature “Doom Debates” on the front and “What’s your P(doom)?” on the back. It’s a conversation starter that invites questions rather than putting people on the defensive. Why This Matters This is crunch time. There’s no more time to beat around the bush or pretend everything’s okay. When you wear this merch, you’re not just making a fashion statement. You’re signaling that P(doom) is uncomfortably high and that we need to stop building dangerous AI before we know how to control it. People will wonder what “Doom Debates” means. They’ll see that you’re bold enough to acknowledge the world faces real threats. Maybe they’ll follow your example. Maybe they’ll start asking questions and learning more. Supporting the Mission The merch store isn’t really about making money for us (we make about $2 per item sold). The show’s production and marketing costs are funded by donations from viewers like you. Visit doomdebates.com/donate to learn more. Donations to Doom Debates are fully tax-deductible through our fiscal sponsor, Manifund.org. You can also support us by becoming a premium subscriber to DoomDebates.com, which helps boost our Substack rankings and visibility. Join the Community Join our Discord community here! It’s a vibrant space where people debate, share memes, discuss new episodes, and talk about where they “get off the doom train.” Moving Forward Together The outpouring of support since we started accepting donations has been incredible. You get what we’re trying to do here—raising awareness and helping the average person understand that AI risk is an imminent threat to them and their loved ones. This is real. This is urgent. And together, we’re moving the Overton window. Thanks for your support. Get full access to Doom Debates at lironshapira.substack.com/subscribe

Eliezer Yudkowsky can warn humankind that If Anyone Builds It, Everyone Dies and get on the New York Times bestseller list, but he won’t get upvoted to the top of LessWrong. According to the leaders of LessWrong, that’s intentional. The rationalist community thinks aggregating community support for important claims is “political fighting”. Unfortunately, the idea that some other community will strongly rally behind Eliezer Yudkowsky’s message while LessWrong “stays out of the fray” and purposely prevents mutual knowledge of support from being displayed, is unrealistic. Our refusal to aggregate the rationalist community beliefs into signals and actions is why we live in a world where rationalists with double-digit P(Doom)s join AI-race companies instead of AI-pause movements. We let our community become a circular firing squad. What did we expect? Timestamps 00:00:00 — Cold Open 00:00:32 — Introducing Holly Elmore, Exec. Director of PauseAI US 00:03:12 — “If Anyone Builds It, Everyone Dies” 00:10:07 — What’s Your P(Doom)™ 00:12:55 — Liron’s Review of IABIED 00:15:29 — Encouraging Early Joiners to a Movement 00:26:30 — MIRI’s Communication Issues 00:33:52 — Government Officials’ Reviews of IABIED 00:40:33 — Emmett Shear’s Review of IABIED 00:42:47 — Michael Nielsen’s Review of IABIED 00:45:35 — New York Times Review of IABIED 00:49:56 — Will MacAskill’s Review of IABIED 01:11:49 — Clara Collier’s Review of IABIED 01:22:17 — Vox Article Review 01:28:08 — The Circular Firing Squad 01:37:02 — Why Our Kind Can’t Cooperate 01:49:56 — LessWrong’s Lukewarm Show of Support 02:02:06 — The “Missing Mood” of Support 02:16:13 — Liron’s “Statement of Support for IABIED” 02:18:49 — LessWrong Community’s Reactions to the Statement 02:29:47 — Liron & Holly’s Hopes for the Community 02:39:01 — Call to Action SHOW NOTES PauseAI US — https://pauseai-us.org PauseAI US Upcoming Events — https://pauseai-us.org/events International PauseAI — https://pauseai.info Holly’s Twitter — https://x.com/ilex_ulmus Referenced Essays & Posts * Liron’s Eliezer Yudkowsky interview post on LessWrong — https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/kiNbFKcKoNQKdgTp8/interview-with-eliezer-yudkowsky-on-rationality-and * Liron’s “Statement of Support for If Anyone Builds It, Everyone Dies ” — https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/aPi4HYA9ZtHKo6h8N/statement-of-support-for-if-anyone-builds-it-everyone-dies * “Why Our Kind Can’t Cooperate” by Eliezer Yudkowsky (2009) — https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/7FzD7pNm9X68Gp5ZC/why-our-kind-can-t-cooperate * “Something to Protect” by Eliezer Yudkowsky — https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/SGR4GxFK7KmW7ckCB/something-to-protect * Center for AI Safety Statement on AI Risk — https://safe.ai/work/statement-on-ai-risk OTHER RESOURCES MENTIONED * Stephen Pinker’s new book on mutual knowledge, When Everyone Knows That Everyone Knows... — https://stevenpinker.com/publications/when-everyone-knows-everyone-knows-common-knowledge-and-mysteries-money-power-and * Scott Alexander’s “Ethnic Tension and Meaningless Arguments” — https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/11/04/ethnic-tension-and-meaningless-arguments/ PREVIOUS EPISODES REFERENCED Holly’s previous Doom Debates appearance debating the California SB 1047 bill — https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xUP3GywD0yM Liron’s interview with Eliezer Yudkowsky about the IABI launch — https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wQtpSQmMNP0 --- Doom Debates’ Mission is to raise mainstream awareness of imminent extinction from AGI and build the social infrastructure for high-quality debate. Support the mission by subscribing to my Substack at DoomDebates.com and to youtube.com/@DoomDebates , or to really take things to the next level: Donate 🙏 Get full access to Doom Debates at lironshapira.substack.com/subscribe

Ex-Twitch Founder and OpenAI Interim CEO Emmett Shear is one of the rare established tech leaders to lend his name and credibility to Eliezer Yudkowsky’s warnings about AI existential risk. Even though he disagrees on some points, he chose to endorse the new book If Anyone Builds It, Everyone Dies: “Soares and Yudkowsky lay out, in plain and easy-to-follow terms, why our current path toward ever-more-powerful AIs is extremely dangerous.” In this interview from the IABED launch party, we dive into Emmett’s endorsement, why the current path is so dangerous, and what he hopes to achieve by taking a different approach at his new startup, Softmax. Watch the full IABED livestream here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lRITRf-jH1g Watch my reaction to Emmett’s talk about Softmax to see why I’m not convinced his preferred alignment track is likely to work: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CBN1E1fvh2g Get full access to Doom Debates at lironshapira.substack.com/subscribe

ATTENTION DOOM DEBATES LISTENERS: We interrupt our usual programming to request that you consider supporting the show. Do you want your family, children & friends to continue living life through these next 10-20 years and beyond? Want to experience the good future where we benefit from research advances that make us healthier, happier, wiser, and longer-lived? Want our descendants to continue flourishing for trillions of millennia? I sure as hell do. I’m thrilled and inspired by the grand future within our reach… Sadly, I’m VERY worried that artificial intelligence may soon cause human extinction, leaving the future permanently devoid of the incredible potential value it once had. I want to safeguard humanity’s chance at participating in the expansive future. I want to swerve away from a premature “GAME OVER” ending. That’s why I started Doom Debates. The Mission Doom Debates’s mission is twofold: * Raise awareness of AI existential risk * Raise the quality of discourse that people can engage with and trust The mission is achieved when the average person realizes AI is life-threatening. Until the average person on Earth sees unaligned, uncontrollable superintelligent AI as life-threatening — that is, an imminent threat to their life and to everything they hold dear — it won’t be feasible for leaders to drive major decisive action to protect us from extinction from superintelligent AI. That’s why raising mainstream awareness of AI x-risk is Doom Debates’s point of highest leverage. Encouragingly, surveys already show that mainstream opinion is already on our side about the level and severity of AI x-risk. What’s missing is urgency. Moving the average person’s opinion from “worried, but in an abstract long-term way” to “alarmed, in an urgent way” creates grassroots demand for drastically better AI policy, and drastically better-informed policymakers. We needed this shift to happen yesterday; it feels late to have to drive it now. But we have no choice. By providing high-quality interviews and debates with mainstream appeal, we’ll make millions of people realize as soon as possible: “Hey, P(doom) is too damn high RIGHT NOW. And we need to do something about it URGENTLY!” One Weird Trick You Can Do To Help If you care about the show’s mission, the #1 way you can help right now is by donating some of your hard-earned cash money 🙏. Spending on production & marketing accelerates the show’s growth, which achieves our mission faster (hopefully before it’s too late). Read on for more details. Where Does The Money Go? I don’t make money from Doom Debates. My “real job” is running an online relationship coaching service , and my passion project is making this show. Any income from Doom Debates, i.e. viewer donations and ad revenue, is fully reinvested into production and marketing. * Producer Ori Thanks to a generous viewer donation, I’ve hired a full-time producer: Ori Nagel . Ori is a rockstar who I’ve known for many years, and he collaborated with me behind the scenes throughout the show’s first year (he’s also in the first episode ) before officially joining Doom Debates as our Producer. I hired him away from the media & outreach team at ControlAI , where he 10x’d their growth on social media channels. You may have noticed the show has already started getting better at editing & thumbnails, putting out more episodes and clips, and landing more prominent guests. We’re getting more done across the board because 1 hour of Ori’s time working on everything except hosting the show = same output as 1 hour of my time. But it’s not all smooth sailing — now that Doom Debates is Ori’s full-time job, he apparently needs to “get paid every month” 🤷‍♂️, so I’m appealing to you to help Ori stay on the job. Help us keep delivering faster progress toward the mission. * Paid Marketing The key to the show’s growth isn’t marketing; it’s the content. To date, we’ve had robust organic growth with minimal marketing spend. Audience size has been doubling every 3 months, and we’re seeing a snowball effect where bigger audiences attract higher-quality guests and vice versa. We’re also happy to see that the show has unusually high engagement and long-term viewer retention. That said, investing in marketing lets us pull forward the same viewership we’d eventually get from organic growth. We’ll soon invest in YouTube ads to go beyond the pace of organic growth. We also keep spending opportunistically on marketing initiatives like sponsoring the Manifest conference and giving away T-shirts. Donation Tiers SUBSTACK SUPPORTERS You can donate as little as $10/month by subscribing to the DoomDebates.com Substack , which shows your support and raises our profile on their leaderboard. I’ll send you a free Doom Debates T-shirt and P(Doom) pin so you can represent the show. Early supporters say the T-shirt is great at starting AI x-risk conversations in a non-confrontational way. 😊 MISSION PARTNERS If you’re serious about lowering P(Doom) and you ha

Science communicator and poker champion Liv Boeree has been concerned about the existential risk of AI for nearly a decade. In this conversation from my If Anyone Builds It, Everyone Dies launch party , Liv explains why even a 5% chance of AI extinction is unacceptable, why the industry often buries its head in the sand, and how advocates can actually make an impact. --- Doom Debates’ Mission is to raise mainstream awareness of imminent extinction from AGI and build the social infrastructure for high-quality debate. Support the mission by subscribing to my Substack at DoomDebates.com and to youtube.com/@DoomDebates , or to really take things to the next level: Donate 🙏 Get full access to Doom Debates at lironshapira.substack.com/subscribe

Eliezer Yudkowsky and Nate Soares just launched their world-changing book, If Anyone Builds It, Everyone Dies . PLEASE BUY YOUR COPY NOW!!! We had an unofficial launch party here on Doom Debates to celebrate the occasion with an incredible group of guests (see timestamps below). Highly recommend watching if you missed it! Timestamps * 00:00 — Cold Open * 00:36 — Max Tegmark, MIT Physicist * 24:58 — Roman Yampolskiy, Cybersecurity Professor * 42:20 Michael of @lethal-intelligence * 48:30 — Liv Boeree, Host of the Win-Win Podcast ( @LivBoeree ) * 1:10:44 — Michael Trazzi, Filmmaker who just went on a hunger strike against Google DeepMind ( @TheInsideView ) * 1:27:21 — Producer Ori * 1:43:53 — Emmett Shear, Founder of Twitch & Softmax * 1:55:32 — Holly Elmore, Executive Director of PauseAI US * 2:13:44 — Gary Marcus, Professor Emeritus of Psychology & Neural Science at NYU * 2:36:13 — Robert Wright, Author of the NonZero Newsletter ( @Nonzero ) * 2:55:50 — Roko Mijic, the Man Behind “Roko’s Basilisk” * 3:19:17 — Rob Miles, AI Safety Educator ( @RobertMilesAI ) * 3:48:31 — Doom Debates Robot Closes Out the Stream! Doom Debates’ Mission is to raise mainstream awareness of imminent extinction from AGI and build the social infrastructure for high-quality debate. Support the mission by subscribing to my Substack at DoomDebates.com and to youtube.com/@DoomDebates Get full access to Doom Debates at lironshapira.substack.com/subscribe

Max Tegmark is an MIT physics professor, science communicator, best-selling author, and the President and co-founder of the Future of Life Institute. There are few individuals who have done more to get the world leaders to come to a shared sense of reality about the extinction threat of AI. His endorsement of Eliezer’s book, If Anyone Builds It, Everyone Dies , states: "The most important book of the decade." Max shared his sharp criticisms of AI companies yesterday on my unofficial IABI launch party livestream ! --- Doom Debates’ Mission is to raise mainstream awareness of imminent extinction from AGI and build the social infrastructure for high-quality debate. Support the mission by subscribing to my Substack at DoomDebates.com and to youtube.com/@DoomDebates Get full access to Doom Debates at lironshapira.substack.com/subscribe

It is Monday, September 15th and my interview with Eliezer Yudkowsky has dropped!!! 👉 WATCH NOW 👈 We had a very unique 2.5-hour discussion covering rationality topics, the AI doom argument, what the AI companies think they're doing, why they don't seem to understand the AI doom argument, what society is doing, how we can help. And of course, his book, "If Anyone Builds It, Everyone Dies," which is officially launching tomorrow. For now, go ahead and watch the Eliezer Yudkowsky interview, and please smash that like button. We gotta get this a lot of likes. Thanks very much for being a Doom Debates watcher. We've also got a launch party coming up. I'll get back to you with more details on that soon. Get full access to Doom Debates at lironshapira.substack.com/subscribe