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
Active evidence filter

Showing developments with attributable Questions & unknowns reactions.

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.

Markets & investment Questions & unknowns
1 live reaction map in this view Jump to the evidence ↓
Multiple readings Harvard ai faculty Markets & investment · 2 attributable reactions
Showing signals surfaced by Hagen Blix ×
Most important

The developments commanding sustained expert attention

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

Established AI field signal Signal 13d ago
⚡ 22 h early

Harvard ai faculty

13 experts across 3 network communities independently surfaced this.

Why this matches Questions & unknowns reaction 1 attributable expert contribution · James Grimmelmann
“What are we even doing here? www.nytimes.com/2026/08/22/b...” evidence ↗
13 experts 3 communities 1 sources clustered
Iris van Rooij Spiros Margaris Eileen Clancy 🧿 James Grimmelmann Mél Hogan / The Data Fix Hagen Blix tante Michael Zimmer +5
Primary source nytimes.com ↗
Debates gaining attention

What experts are discussing without an anchoring article

3 experts · 21 posts · 16d ago
Hagen Blix Benjamin Riley Anthony Moser
Matches Questions & unknowns
“I'm not saying it will make everyone bad, and I wasn't talking about evil at all here?” evidence ↗
Multiple readings Concern & critique · 2 Research & technical analysis · 1
Hagen Blix: .. something that we construct in each other. Much of it is about mutual legibility. Now, for the first time, we have machines that go off the deep end with you, that create a sense of legibility t…
Hagen Blix: Also, good liberal individualists that we are, we're gonna start by treating AI psychoses as an individual moral failure, which will be as perfect a mismatch for the situation as can be
Open the thread →
2 experts · 5 posts · 15d ago
Hagen Blix Benjamin Riley
Matches Questions & unknowns
“Have you come across any good writing on a positive vision for automation, and how it'd be different from the stuff currently being sold as AI?” evidence ↗
Hagen Blix: Have you come across any good writing on a positive vision for automation, and how it'd be different from the stuff currently being sold as AI?
Benjamin Riley: I had a long conversation with a member of the Amish community recently. “If you make your world about efficiency, eventually efficiency will come for you,” he said, and I have not stopped thinking…
Open the thread →