An Open Letter To Steven Pinker On AI

Dear Steven:

Earlier this month, frustrated by some of your social media posts, I challenged you to a public debate on AI.

I hadn't realized that debate offers are to New Media what chum is to sharks. My inbox was deluged by podcasters, debating societies, and general influencers, all offering to host. When I objected that maybe we should wait for you to accept before figuring out details, they all said great, that's absolutely right, they would contact you right away. Their people would reach out to your people. Their nephew knew your friend's babysitter and they were confident they could relay the message. They had already rented an empty lot near your house where they would place a speaker blaring "RESPOND TO SCOTT ALEXANDER'S DEBATE OFFER!" at max volume, day and night. I protested that probably asking you directly on Twitter was enough to get your attention, and maybe now we should give you some time to make up your mind before pressing further, but they said that no, sorry, they'd already hired the team from Inception to place subtle debate-related messages in your dreams.

So I feel a little bad for unintentionally harassing you, and doubly so after you responded in your trademark reasonable and charitable style with An Open Letter To Scott Alexander. You write that in-person debates seem confrontational and not truth-seeking. Apologizing for any inadvertent offense you may have given with your social media posts, you nevertheless deny my accusations of personal attacks, saying that your primary contribution to the discourse has been reasonable arguments about why AI might not be so dangerous after all (which you go on to list). You invite me to respond to these arguments in the same spirit of respectful mutual intellectual inquiry with which they are offered.

I agree that in-person debates are confrontational and bad for truth-seeking. But I didn't propose a debate in order to seek truth. I proposed it because, under California Penal Code § 415(1), it's illegal for me to challenge you to a duel. I think your public writing on this topic has been dishonorable. Out of obligation, I will respond to the meaty arguments that you have set out for me. But what would be viscerally satisfying would be to make you get up on a stage where I read your own words to you in real time and ask "Really? Really?" after each sentence. Then I could watch you squirm as you try to square your output with your status as one of America's top public intellectuals.

So I'll start by addressing the meaty arguments, move on to directly impugning your honor, and then we'll decide whether to debate, duel, or seek some kind of synthesis of our conflicting views.

https://www.astralcodexten.com/p/an-open-letter-to-steven-pinker-on