Over 2 years ago @sayashk and I wrote a detailed deconstruction of p(doom) and argued that its primary function is to launder vague, evidenc…

Over 2 years ago @sayashk and I wrote a detailed deconstruction of p(doom) and argued that its primary function is to launder vague, evidence-free intuitions and fears through a facade of quantification. It remains 100% relevant today. https://www.normaltech.ai/p/ai-existential-risk-probabilities There is a strange laundering of this number. It was floated by Anthropic employees without public justification. Then mathematicians pick it up and now it is attributed to their judgment. It’s fine to survey AI practitioners, but posts like this are a bad epistemic practice.

Source: Gary Marcus (X) | 2026-09-17