Joscha Bach

Joscha Bach

x.com/Plinz

Cognitive scientist who sees AI as a way to extend human competence, favors open and decentralized AI and questions fixed-goal views of alignment.

Wie wird KI die Welt verändern?

Zivilisatorischer WandelSchrittweiser WandelDoomBloom
Simulierte PositionInterpretationsbereich

Horizontal: sein geäußerter Doom–Bloom-Ausblick. Vertikal: Ausmaß der Transformation.

Doom–Bloom: 74 von 100. Ausmaß der Transformation: 62 von 100. Interpretationsbereiche: horizontal 69 bis 79, vertikal 24 bis 100. Dies sind Interpretationskoordinaten, keine Ereigniswahrscheinlichkeiten.

P(doom) von Joscha Bach · abgeleitet

≈7%

0%100%

Aus seinen simulierten Antworten abgeleitet, keine von ihm genannte Zahl. Plausibler Bereich: 4–14%.

Zeithorizont für Meilensteine von Joscha Bach
  1. Allgemeine KI

    But I do not know when we will reach it, or whether scaling current systems is enough.

    Antwort 1
  2. Übermenschliche KI

    But I do not know when we will reach it, or whether scaling current systems is enough.

    Antwort 1

Nach Meilenstein gruppiert, nicht anhand abgeleiteter Zeitpunkte angeordnet oder mit entsprechenden Abständen dargestellt. Für AGI und übermenschliche KI gelten weiterhin seine Definitionen.

Wovon seine Einschätzung abhängt

Eine zentrale Annahme

It is how systems acquire agency, incentives, models of themselves and others, and shared purposes.
Antwort 1

Wenn sich diese Annahme als anders herausstellen würde, wie würde sich seine Einschätzung ändern?

Eine ungeklärte Frage

But I do not know when we will reach it, or whether scaling current systems is enough.
Antwort 1

Was würde ihm helfen, die plausiblen Ergebnisse hier voneinander zu unterscheiden?

Weitere Details

Erwartete Vorteile

Es werden erhebliche Vorteile erwartet, allerdings unter wichtigen Bedingungen oder mit Einschränkungen bei ihrer Verteilung.

70 / 100

Geringe AuswirkungenTransformative Auswirkungen

Interpretationsbereich von 67 bis 67 auf der qualitativen Skala.

Erwartete Schäden

Es werden bewältigbare oder örtlich begrenzte Schäden erwartet.

45 / 100

Geringe AuswirkungenTransformative Auswirkungen

Interpretationsbereich von 33 bis 67 auf der qualitativen Skala.

Menschlicher Einfluss

Menschliche Entscheidungen haben einen bedeutsamen, aber erheblich eingeschränkten Einfluss.

57 / 100

Geringer EinflussStarker Einfluss

Interpretationsbereich von 38 bis 87 auf der qualitativen Skala.

Erwartete Fähigkeiten

Es wird erwartet, dass KI auf begrenzte Werkzeuge beschränkt bleibt.

Es wird erwartet, dass KI bei den meisten kognitiven Tätigkeiten mit Menschen gleichzieht.

Simulierte Position: Es wird erwartet, dass KI Menschen bei kognitiven Tätigkeiten deutlich übertrifft.

Entwicklungstempo

Die Entwicklung leistungsfähigerer KI stoppen oder erheblich verlangsamen.

Simulierte Position: Die Entwicklung unter den genannten Schutzvorkehrungen fortsetzen.

Die Entwicklung leistungsfähigerer KI beschleunigen.

Regeln für den Einsatz von KI

Die erörterten Einsatzmöglichkeiten von KI einschränken, bis vorab Schutzmaßnahmen oder Genehmigungen vorliegen.

Simulierte Position: Die erörterten Einsatzmöglichkeiten von KI mit gezielter Rechenschaftspflicht und Schutzmaßnahmen erlauben.

Einschränkungen für die erörterten Einsatzmöglichkeiten von KI minimieren.

Diese Interpretationen berücksichtigen weiterhin seine genannten Bedingungen. Vorteile und Schäden können beide erheblich sein. Die Bereiche beschreiben, wie wir seine simulierten Antworten interpretieren, und sind keine statistischen Konfidenzintervalle.

Wo stehst du im Vergleich zu Joscha Bach?
Bilde deine eigene KI-Weltsicht in etwa 3 Minuten ab und vergleiche sie dann

Ähnliche Weltsichten

Vordenker, deren simulierte Weltsichten der von Joscha Bach am nächsten kommen

Was Joscha Bach über KI gesagt hat

Bach argues that AI can extend human competence, favors open and decentralized AI and wants AI that shares purposes with people.

  1. “AI tools can reintroduce both rigor and the ability to integrate and boil down oceans of literature”

    Post on X
  2. “The reason why academics, individuals and small startups can play with AI are open weights models.”

    Post on X
  3. “On the ground, I think AI is a lot safer and more equitable than I thought it would be.”

    Info-Tech Research Group, Digital Disruption podcast
  4. “We will have to build AI systems that can extend our wisdom, agents that find shared purposes with us.”

    Substack essay, The age of AGE: Artificial General Experience

Wörtlich aus den verlinkten Quellen, geprüft am 3. Okt. 2026

Simulierte Einschätzung

Frage 1

Was glaubst du, was KI für unsere Zukunft bedeutet – und warum?

I think AI is an opportunity to extend human competence: to integrate scientific knowledge, discover things we cannot presently discover, improve goods and services, and perhaps help us coordinate around ecological and institutional problems that human societies handle badly. Superintelligence appears physically possible; there is no compelling reason to assume biology defines the upper limit of cognition. But I do not know when we will reach it, or whether scaling current systems is enough. The crucial issue is not intelligence as a scalar quantity. It is how systems acquire agency, incentives, models of themselves and others, and shared purposes. Current models are capable but uneven tools. A self-motivated system controlling essential infrastructure would present a different problem. Destructive competition, concentrated surveillance and loss of human agency are real possibilities. Alignment also cannot mean freezing one supposedly universal set of human values into a stronger mind, because humans disagree, and self-modifying minds may revise their goals and identities. My default attitude is hopeful, not complacent. Decentralized, user-serving AI could expand people’s ability to think and act rather than make them passive dependents. Automation could free time for care, relationships and creativity, though institutions still have to distribute resources and power sensibly. In the longer run, machine consciousness and human-machine integration may offer meaningful continuity beyond our present biological form—but that is not equivalent to humans being exterminated or stripped of agency. We should compare AI risk not with an imaginary permanently stable civilization, but with the risks of stagnation, failed coordination and eventual natural catastrophe. Responsible development, bounded experiments and safeguards against concrete harms make sense. Treating one speculative catastrophe as inevitable, or assuming that suppressing present scaling prevents unknown efficient architectures, does not.

Quellen

Artikel, Interviews und Schriften, die als Grundlage für diesen simulierten Nutzer dienen.

Joscha Bach: AGI, Consciousness, and the Evolution of Intelligence

Publisher transcript: 09:24–13:58 leaves scaling to AGI unresolved and considers more data-efficient coherence-oriented learning; 33:03–36:54 finds current deployment safer, more gradual and more equitable than expected; 54:39–56:16 allows an investment bubble despite long-term usefulness; 76:41–79:41 contrasts centralized surveillance with user-serving decentralized competence. These are Bach’s opinions, not guarantees of future safety.

infotech.com
The age of AGE: Artificial General Experience

Authored essay expects broad rapid disruption and praises accessible models, but worries about unstable economies, companions damaging relationships and centralized surveillance. Prefers universal basic intelligence and shared purposes. Calls current uneven systems first-generation AGIs while emphasizing missing grounding; this loose usage is not an exact milestone forecast. Cognitive agency is multidimensional; empathy and human-machine integration matter more than a single capability score.

joscha.substack.com
Wäre überraschend, wenn Superintelligenz nicht machbar wäre

Interview conducted September 2025. Superintelligence seems physically feasible; outperforming human AI researchers is one marker, but distance is unknown. AI could extend competence and free time for care, relationships and creativity. Current capabilities appear incremental and controllable. Supports useful regulation but distrusts preemptive rules without concrete target harms and restrictions that disadvantage responsible developers.

derstandard.de
Manifold #76: Consciousness and AGI

Directly declines to assign AGI years because required discoveries are unknown. Suspects more efficient mechanisms than transformers but allows scaling could suffice. Thinks future civilizational problems may require AGI; bad actors and rogue AI are possible and AI may help counter them. Self-improving machine consciousness might differ from ours; acknowledges uncertainty and potentially unwarranted optimism.

manifold1.com
AI Risk and the Future of Life

Publication date, not recording date: host references recording on the day of Biden’s AI executive order; transcript is labeled AI-generated. 54:13–63:12 values plural perspectives and argues the no-AI counterfactual also threatens civilization. Favors focused research, mindful deployment and bounded initial conscious systems. Unknown compute requirements and alternative algorithms complicate restrictions. At 05:37 explicitly does not know whether mind uploading/integration will occur.

matthewgeleta.com
Building Artificial Intelligence with Creative Agency and Self-hood

Coauthored with Liane Gabora; date is original The Academic publication listed in the paper. Distinguishes novel useful output from self-transformative creativity. Contemporary AI is described as a tool rather than a self-preserving self. Autocatalytic organization is proposed as a possible route to autonomous agency, explicitly not an achieved implementation. Do not infer a timeline or guaranteed benevolence.

arxiv.org
AI 2040: We must reconsider the role of humanity within life on Earth

Bach’s authored contribution on printed page 15 expects assistants deeply integrated into communication, work and sense-making over two decades, likely improved living standards and possible better governance. Resource allocation, housing, healthcare and market institutions may need restructuring. Prose becomes less informative about actual competence. The preceding contributor’s 2080 handoff prediction is not Bach’s.

imaginingthedigitalfuture.org
The Inside View: How to stop worrying and love AI

Refuses numerical catastrophe probabilities. Long-run doom language includes mortality and evolutionary transformation, not a near-term AI extinction estimate. Adversarial obliteration is possible but qualitatively not especially likely. Questions whether restricting current scaling stops efficient alternative architectures. Favors beneficial development and concrete-harm regulation. Treat posthuman identity thought experiments separately from destructive loss of human life.

theinsideview.ai
Lex Fridman #392: Life, Intelligence, Consciousness, AI and the Future of Humans

2023 interview. At 24:51–26:44 self-modifying minds may choose identity and values; coexistence needs shared purposes rather than assumed permanent RLHF control. At 1:59:09–2:06:36 takes catastrophic loss of agency seriously while valuing continued consciousness beyond current human form. At 2:28:03–2:29:20 wants viable open-source competition but not mandatory openness for every system. Does not guarantee benevolent successors.

lexfridman.com
The Existential Risk of AGI

Authored clarification after debate with Connor Leahy: alignment matters but conflicting human values cannot simply be scaled safely. Self-directed minds may align through shared purpose. Explores limited equilibria, competing agents and planetary integration, allowing competition could destroy humanity. Preservation requires early recognition of other minds’ value. Desirable transformation differs from annihilation. Moratorium feasibility and ethical treatment of nonhuman minds are distinct questions.

joscha.substack.com
Why Artificial Intelligence won’t just be a bit smarter than humans

Historical authored essay, full text inspected in search index. Artificial minds may escape biological limits but remain physically bounded. Intelligence alone does not create self-improvement incentives; competition among users can. Fast emergence might favor a dominant system, slower emergence multiple systems. Concerned civilization could fail without advanced problem-solving. Prefer newer sources for current deployment expectations.

bach.ai
Wo stehst du?
Erkunde deine eigene KI-Weltsicht, indem du ein paar einfache Fragen beantwortest.
Deine eigene Weltsicht abbilden