I read Anthropic’s blog post about the future, and it essentially boils down to one key point: Anthropic assumes that the current pace of development will continue.

While there are scenarios where development could slow down or perhaps even stall - following an S-curve trajectory - these are considered unlikely. We can expect AI to keep improving; currently, Anthropic sees no end to this development- quite the opposite, in fact. They point to the last few years to demonstrate just how exponential this progress is. Recursive self-improvement is a realistic scenario. The bottom line is that we are likely unprepared for what lies ahead.

A minor caveat, however: in my view, robotics- as a subsequent technology - is not being factored in sufficiently. But far more significant - as I wrote earlier - is that a slowdown is highly unlikely.

"If it were possible to effectively slow the development of this technology to give ourselves more time to deal with its immense implications, we think that would likely be a good thing. But if a slowdown simply lets the least cautious actors catch up technologically, it could leave everyone less safe. Without a global coordination mechanism, companies and governments will have to make difficult decisions about safety while under competitive and geopolitical pressures."

In doing so, they acknowledge what we have all already assumed - and what is, at the same time, a certainty. Anthropic views the US as being locked in fierce competition with China and therefore does not believe that a slowdown is possible.

Consequently, both Anthropic and OpenAI maintain the view that there is no end to this development in sight and that we will, in all likelihood, experience a profound impact on our societies.

We urgently need a broad societal discussion about this.