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.

0 live reaction maps in this view

No development in this filter has enough independent reactions yet. The maps appear as soon as the evidence supports them.

Showing signals surfaced by M.J. Crockett ×
Debated

The questions experts are actively pulling apart

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

No developments match these filters yet.

Try the field-wide view or clear one of the filters.

Clear filters
More conversations

What experts are discussing without an anchoring article

3 experts · 4 posts · 4d ago
Olivia Guest M.J. Crockett Meredith Martin
M.J. Crockett: "An alternative read of everything we’re presented is just that three credulous people whose lives revolve around AI consciousness took their spam emails too seriously."
Meredith Martin: "An alternative read of everything we’re presented is just that three credulous people whose lives revolve around AI consciousness took their spam emails too seriously."
Open the thread →
3 experts · 7 posts · 12d ago
M.J. Crockett Brad Wyble Dan Goodman
Brad Wyble: I'm serious, this needs to stop. Journal EICs, we need new policies or reviewers will choke to death on 30 page papers that should just be 10.
Dan Goodman: I've got a ten thousand word essay to prove you're wrong, and the onus is in you to go through it and find the mistake. 😉
Open the thread →