Doomers vs boosters: Who's who in the global fight over the risks of AI

The global debate surrounding artificial intelligence (AI) has evolved into a fierce rivalry between two opposing factions: the doomers and the boosters. Caught in the middle is a cautious group, unsure of how to navigate the rapidly developing technology.

Doomers are those who foresee catastrophic consequences for society as a result of AI. Their concerns are not new, as the fear of technology's potential dangers has existed throughout history. In recent times, many of the doomer warnings have come from within the AI industry itself, from major corporations and academia alike.

One example of a doomer is Dario Amodei, co-founder of Anthropic, a leading AI company. He left OpenAI due to his belief that the company was not taking AI's potential and risks seriously enough. Another prominent doomer is Geoffrey Hinton and Yoshua Bengio, two computer scientists who warned about AI's threats shortly after the release of ChatGPT in 2022.

On the other side of the debate are the boosters, or accelerationists. They believe in the inevitability and benefits of AI advancement for society, and they are making fortunes on its success. The accelerationist ethos is widely present in Silicon Valley, most notably represented by venture capitalists such as Marc Andreessen and David Sacks.

Unlike the doomer camp, accelerationists are largely against regulation, accusing doomer advocates of being a front for companies seeking to use regulation to crush rivals. They support unrestricted AI development and dismiss talk of AI-driven extinction as "complete nonsense."

Despite their differences, both camps are present in the industry. Many of the big tech companies are taking a cautious approach, walking a fine line between addressing AI's dangers and accelerating its growth.