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 Building & implementation 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.

Building & implementation
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.

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 · 48 posts · 1d ago
Grace B! 🐝 Cavello (they/them) Singularity's Bounty e/cc
Matches Building & implementation
“What do we do about this? Substack lets you check for AI with pangram, but it doesn’t show a label upfront. I assume if it started doing that authors would optimize against it. Maybe build it into …” evidence ↗
Multiple readings Policy & governance · 1 Building & implementation · 1 Questions & unknowns · 1
Grace: AI writing, unfortunately
Grace: What do we do about this? Substack lets you check for AI with pangram, but it doesn’t show a label upfront. I assume if it started doing that authors would optimize against it. Maybe build it into …
Open the thread →
3 experts · 19 posts · 18h ago
Thomas Dietterich Konrad Kording David Picard
Matches Building & implementation
“There are definitely multiple uses of "agent" in AI. The engineering view: A system designed to take actions in order to achieve goals. (Russell & Norvig).” evidence ↗
Multiple readings Questions & unknowns · 2 Concern & critique · 1
Konrad Kording: Why on earth did we, as a field, allow the word "agent" to be used the way it currently is?
Thomas Dietterich: Which particular usage are your referring to? "agentic" systems? Russell and Norvig's definition?
Open the thread →
3 experts · 12 posts · 18h ago
Ted Underwood tachikoma Doll
Matches Building & implementation
“This is the bitter lesson in reverse. Sutton says "building in how we think we think does not work in the long run." But what if instead we a) build something that works and then b) ask, how it had…” evidence ↗
Multiple readings Concern & critique · 1 Research & technical analysis · 1
Ted Underwood: This is a good reason to be interested in interpretability. LLMs aren't very good at fiction yet, but once they are, I bet we learn a lot by contrasting the processes that produce gripping stories …
Ted Underwood: This is the bitter lesson in reverse. Sutton says "building in how we think we think does not work in the long run." But what if instead we a) build something that works and then b) ask, how it had…
Open the thread →