Expert attention map

The Who's Who of AI

What credible people across AI noticed, why it matters, and where the field is converging or disagreeing.

2,397 searchable experts 4,280 tracked across all sources
Build my stream Create my edition
Filter the conversation Who is saying what?

Combine a professional role with a reaction lens. Both must match the same attributed contribution.

Clear all
New Network reaction maps

See how experts are reacting—not just what they shared.

Posts are grouped by conversation and tone. Select a lens to filter the stream; these are never permanent labels on people.

Concern & critique Questions & unknowns
1 live reaction map in this view Jump to the evidence ↓
Multiple readings No, Artificial Intelligence Is Not Conscious Concern & critique · 3 attributable reactions
Showing signals surfaced by Matt Darling ×
New & accelerating

What is moving across the network now

One card per development. Sources are clustered; reaction bundles describe these posts, never the people behind them.

Established Culture, work & education Analysis 4d ago
⚡ 305 h early
Atlantic AI not conscious essay

No, Artificial Intelligence Is Not Conscious

15 experts across 5 network communities independently surfaced this.

15 experts 5 communities 1 sources clustered
Emily M. Bender Shannon Vallor Woodrow Hartzog Frank Pasquale Roland Meyer Daniel Solove Charles Logan Bhaskar Mitra | ভাস্কর মিত্র +7
How the network is reacting Experts are approaching this through 2 distinct lenses.
Multiple readings

Concern & critique

2 experts

Risks, limits and unintended consequences.

“«Generative AI is harmful enough when we understand it as a conventional technology, but if we confuse fluency at generating text with consciousness or moral agency, we’re at risk of assigning responsibility to entirely the wrong parties whenever anyone use…”

Questions & unknowns

1 expert

What remains unresolved or contested.

“This is the Atlantic essay? www.theatlantic.com/philosophy/2... My understanding was that cogsci folks were very dissmissive.”

6 experts discussed this · 41 posts
Matt Darling: It's very funny that from my perspective, Stancil is just arguing against Vulgar Dualism, but the philosphers think he is commenting on the difference between Functionalism and Compatibilism.
lastpositivist.bsky.social: i feel a little bad for the philosophers but we're five or six days into this and i'm pretty sure that from the noncombatant perspective they're the most pleasant Bluesky cohort for Will Stancil to…
Matt Darling: It's always sort of interesting seeing how different academic fields deal with public engagement.
Open the full discussion →
Primary source theatlantic.com ↗
Established Culture, work & education Signal 4d ago

An approach to human machine collaborati

2 experts are actively discussing the implications.

1 expert 0 communities 1 sources clustered
Matt Darling

“Its funny because part of this might just be people defining "creativity" weirdly. I always liked the definition of "using obscure features of the problem" as in this paper. ahauniverse.weebly.com/uploads/2/5/...”

2 experts discussed this · 4 posts
Ryan Moulton: 👏AT👏LEAST👏READ👏THE👏NEWS👏BEFORE👏FORMING👏CONFIDENT👏OPINIONS👏
Matt Darling: Its funny because part of this might just be people defining "creativity" weirdly. I always liked the definition of "using obscure features of the problem" as in this paper. ahauniverse.weebly.com/…
Matt Darling: (the classic example - you need to join two solid steel rings using a matchbook and a candle. Most people try to melt the candle (doesn't work!). You need to use the obscure feature that the "wick"…
Open the full discussion →
Primary source ahauniverse.weebly.com ↗
Established AI field signal Signal 6d ago

library.agnescameron.info

3 experts are actively discussing the implications.

1 expert 0 communities 1 sources clustered
Matt Darling

“Oh great, there's a PDF of "Vehicles" readily available. library.agnescameron.info/artificial%2...”

3 experts discussed this · 14 posts
Matt Darling: Which book do you have in mind in particular?
Matt Darling: For example, I might recommend Dennett's "Consciousness Explained", Braitenberg's "Vehicles", or just a CogSci textbook.
Matt Darling: Is there a specific topic you think the above recommendations don't cover?
Open the full discussion →
Primary source library.agnescameron.info ↗
Debates gaining attention

What experts are discussing without an anchoring article

6 experts · 78 posts · 3h ago
Henry Farrell Dustin Moskovitz Colin rev. howard arson tweety fish Matt Darling
Multiple readings Concern & critique · 1 Policy & governance · 1 Research & technical analysis · 1
rev. howard arson: what i am trying to get at here is that rationalism was an attempt to outline what turned out to be the extraordinary power of statistical systems at tasks for which they naively seem unsuited. vie…
rev. howard arson: "how do we get human values into these things" was broadly considered an intractable problem, and this was a central question of the movement even after we more or less made the first candidates of…
Open the thread →
2 experts · 23 posts · 2d ago
Matt Darling Singularity's Bounty e/cc
Multiple readings Building & implementation · 1 Questions & unknowns · 1
Matt Darling: Isn't that the assumption under debate, though?
Matt Darling: Like it seems perfectly plausible that "thinking requires billions of years of feedback from the complicated external enviroment" but I also think we should be at least *willing* to be surprised if…
Open the thread →