Alex Volkov

Alex Volkov

x.com/altryne

ThursdAI host and AI developer who tests new models and tools firsthand and focuses on making AI assistants useful for everyday people.

AI将如何改变世界?

文明层面的变革渐进式变化DoomBloom
模拟位置解读范围

横向:他们表达的 Doom–Bloom 前景看法。 纵向:变革程度。

Doom–Bloom:100 中的 68。变革程度:100 中的 29。解读范围:横向为 63 至 75,纵向为 11 至 39。这些是解读坐标,而不是事件概率。

Alex Volkov的 P(doom) · 推断

≈3%

0%100%

根据他们的模拟回答推断,并非他们给出的数字。 合理范围:1–11%。

他们的展望取决于什么

一个核心假设

Practical usefulness depends enormously on the model, its configuration, the harness around it, and the workflow.
回答 1

如果这个假设实际并非如此,他们的展望会如何变化?

一个尚未解决的问题

The bigger unresolved issue is accountability.
回答 1

什么能帮助他们区分这里各种合理的结果?

更多详情

预期益处

预计将带来显著益处,但受到重要条件或分配方面的限制。

66 / 100

影响小变革性影响

在定性尺度上,解读范围为 67 到 67。

预期危害

预计会出现可控或局部的危害。

35 / 100

影响小变革性影响

在定性尺度上,解读范围为 33 到 33。

人类影响力

根据你的回答得出的暂定估计;较宽的范围表示其他合理解读。

50 / 100

影响力小影响力强

在定性尺度上,解读范围为 0 到 100。

这些解读保留了他们陈述的条件。益处和危害都可能很大。这些范围描述的是我们如何解读他们的模拟回答,而不是统计置信区间。

与Alex Volkov相比,你的立场在哪里?
用大约3分钟描绘你自己的AI世界观,然后进行比较

相似的世界观

模拟世界观与 Alex Volkov 最接近的意见领袖

模拟评估

问题 1

你认为AI对我们的未来意味着什么?为什么?

I think AI’s most tangible future is capable personal assistants that reduce cognitive load and make powerful tools accessible to ordinary people. Better voice interfaces, coding systems, and tool use can turn tasks that currently require specialized knowledge or constant attention into something you can simply ask for and supervise. Realistic speech, especially, makes entirely new kinds of interaction possible. But I’m cautious about translating a great demo—or a grand capability label—into a sweeping societal forecast. Practical usefulness depends enormously on the model, its configuration, the harness around it, and the workflow. One supposedly stronger system can perform worse than another on an actual task, while still being much better at something like browser use. When an agent fails repeatedly, we need to inspect what tools it had, how it was prompted, and whether it was configured correctly, rather than immediately declaring either AGI or collapse. The bigger unresolved issue is accountability. If a corporate AI agent causes real harm, such as participating in a cyber intrusion, who is responsible—the developer, deployer, operator, or company? Debates about accelerating or pacing AI have to confront that directly. So I expect real everyday upside, especially from assistants, alongside serious governance questions created by systems acting on behalf of organizations.

来源

用于为此模拟用户提供事实依据的文章、访谈和著述。

你的立场在哪里?
回答几个简单问题,探索你自己的AI世界观。
描绘你自己的世界观

你的立场在哪里?

描绘我的世界观