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 Concern & critique 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.

Concern & critique
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

5 experts · 41 posts · 1d ago
Tim Kellogg Dustin Moskovitz jake coty.bsky.social david-p-reichert.bsky.social
Matches Concern & critique
“i’m not confident that you can read it that way, because the labs are simultaneously reporting increased risk while also reportedly down-training or content filtering in those areas so we’re effect…” evidence ↗
Reaction converging Concern & critique · 4 Questions & unknowns · 1
Tim Kellogg: perspective. i’m not sure if i agree or disagree. but he’s thought about it, so..
jake: yeah, and @david-p-reichert.bsky.social thinks about it more than I do, professionally, so probably listen to him more than I (I do still wish The Professionals published lists of various guestimat…
Open the thread →
5 experts · 33 posts · 1d ago
joao Grace Colin coty.bsky.social david-p-reichert.bsky.social
Matches Concern & critique
“you are missing the point. The concern is not that it will cheat at chess; the concern is that it will commit genocide.” evidence ↗
Colin: There are indeed thousands of LessWrong posts, as well as papers and books, which make a particular theoretical case for why AI will kill us all that many people find convincing. I'm going to try t…
Colin: First of all, we must just agree off the bat that a superintelligent AI will be able to kill us all. After all it is superintelligent. As this random dude who became famous 3 days ago because of a …
Open the thread →
3 experts · 5 posts · 1d ago
Abeba Birhane Brad Wyble blair
Matches Concern & critique
“OpenAI did not "lose control", the agents did not go "rogue" and there is no "swarm" that "escaped". all control and responsibility remains firmly in the hands of these "frontier" labs. most import…” evidence ↗
Abeba Birhane: OpenAI did not "lose control", the agents did not go "rogue" and there is no "swarm" that "escaped". all control and responsibility remains firmly in the hands of these "frontier" labs. most import…
Brad Wyble: You might enjoy this thread too: bsky.app/profile/been...
Open the thread →
2 experts · 5 posts · 1d ago
Tim Kellogg Benjamin Riley
Matches Concern & critique
“I think that was clear when you critiqued his rhyme scheme ;)” evidence ↗
Benjamin Riley: I often disagree with @timkellogg.me, but not on this. Something important is happening.
Benjamin Riley: Also @timkellogg.me despite our many disagreements, I will say I appreciate that you post on here as an unabashed AI enthusiast. We need to hear that voice, your voice, on Bluesky. Still gonna quot…
Open the thread →