I love all of the openness of the AI technology and the whole Geist of Open Source and open debate. Said that one downside of this is that as a whole AI has a quite low barrier of entrance that you can have tons of grifters capturing (or trying to) the whole discussion.
Maybe I am overreacting but when I worked in way more critical industries if someone with no credentials or track record came up and say that is a “Financial Safety” to people in Morgan Stanley, Deutsche Bank or Ing people on those places would call those charlatans out in less than 10 seconds.
I think I mostly agree, but what kind of credentials or track record would be automatically credible in "AI safety". There are conflicting views and not an agreed upon body of practice for what it means, so yes there are charlatans but also just different viewpoints. Arguable the charlatans stick to some of the more mainstream stuff (if your model passes a "bias" test it's good to go). Whether someone is good or bad at AI safety is still much more of a holistic assessment. Whereas in established industries it would be obvious.
Maybe I am overreacting but when I worked in way more critical industries if someone with no credentials or track record came up and say that is a “Financial Safety” to people in Morgan Stanley, Deutsche Bank or Ing people on those places would call those charlatans out in less than 10 seconds.