Keep at it Liron
14
Doom Debates — Serious AI X-Risk Debates & Analysis as Mainstream Infotainment
Doom Debates's mission is to be a popular mainstream-accessible forum for discourse about AI extinction risk.
Since 2024, we've been hosting discussions and debates with prominent intellectuals and media personalities (watch on Substack or YouTube).
We're steadily moving the Overton window to where everyone is expected to have a thoughtful position on AI extinction risk, ideally one that doesn’t dismiss it as meaningless or <1% chance.
We lower P(Doom) by building society-wide common knowledge that experts, leaders, and famous people of every kind are engaging with artificial superintelligence as an urgent societal-scale risk.
The Doom Debates Team
Host: Liron Shapira
Producer: Ori Nagel
Producer Interns: Alfred Churchill and Ronak Saxena
Our guests have included:
Michael Levitt (Nobel Prize)
Moshe Vardi (Turing Award)
Keith Duggar (Machine Learning Street Talk)
Daniel Holz (Chair of the Doomsday Clock organization)
Eliezer Yudkowsky (interview on separate channel)
Our "man on the street" episodes:
I’ve also been invited to appear on or collaborate with:
Dr. Phil, Jubilee "Middle Ground", Destiny, Mike Israetel, Rob Miles, Siliconversations, Wes Roth, Robert Wright, Steve Bannon's War Room, Prepper News, The Cognitive Revolution, The Bayesian Conspiracy, The Cosmopolatin Globalist, Universe Today, Primer
Praise for Doom Debates
“I generally don’t like debates as a format, but by getting such outstanding guests as Max [Tegmark] and Dean [Ball] to focus in on what is very plausibly the most important question of our time, that is, how likely is it that advanced AI will in fact go catastrophically wrong, Liron is making the format work, and I definitely encourage everyone to subscribe.”
“Liron Shapira created a point-by-point video response to my podcast with Liv Boeree, focused on the parts about AI safety. I finally had a chance to watch it today. The response is great, including the many parts where Liron tears me a new asshole! Highly recommended.”
“Liron, deeply appreciate how you've been trying to deepen the discourse about AI risk in the public sector. You've had a diversity of great minds on here, and honored for what you're doing and appreciate what you're doing.”
“I highly recommend Liron Shapira’s show!”
“These are strong guests… I do love that he is doing this”
The YouTube channel Doom Debates: quickly becoming one of my favorite sources for information with respect to the developments in artificial intelligence…You're a great science communicator.”
"I highly recommend this newsletter, and the author's YouTube channel, for vigorous debates about the risks of AI. You'll find all views represented and rigorously debated, doomer & accelerationist alike, by people in an excellent position to know what they're talking about. Whenever you're told that only ninnies worry about AI risk, check to see whether that argument has been discussed here and see what you make of the rebuttals."
Joe Allen, Host of Bannon’s War Room
“What I really appreciate about your show is that you're not just simply berating people. You're not necessarily an evangelist. You are holding your ideas and other people's ideas up to scrutiny.…I cannot recommend enough the Doom Debate platform.”
“You're having really important conversations on a very narrow topic in a way that no one else is really doing, so it's awesome.”
Audience Growth
The show gets over 20,000 YouTube watch-hours/month and over 10,000 podcast downloads/month.
Since we’re anticipating a rapid increase in mainstream interest in the topic of AI extinction risk, we believe Doom Debates is well positioned to grow these metrics by 10-100x in the next 1-3 years. (For comparison, Dwarkesh Podcast is currently about 25x ahead of Doom Debates in terms of watch & listen time.)
Theory Of Impact
We plan to help millions gain a deeper, more nuanced, more useful, and more actionable understanding of AI extinction risk.
To that end, we will continue to:
Produce a consistent stream of high-quality interviews and debates with thought leaders across a wide spectrum of AI x-risk positions
Document, probe and challenge the nuanced & evolving claims and arguments put forward
Provide consistent, timely, mainstream-accessible analysis from an informed and AI-extinction-risk-concerned viewpoint
These impacts scale with the show's audience and caliber of guests. Funding production operations (e.g. research, content prep, editing, guest outreach) accelerates the show's growth & impact snowball, wherein a larger audience attracts higher-caliber guests who attract a larger audience.
I believe funding Doom Debates has a high marginal impact because the show is taking a clear shot at filling a gap in mainstream AI x-risk discourse that could be highly influential and highly positive, and it doesn’t seem like other projects are directly competing with us to fill the same gap.
We Are Almost 100% Viewer Funded
Our viewers have donated over $200k to the show to date. (This plus ~$5k/yr of YouTube ad revenue has been our entire funding to date.) The breakdown of viewer donation amounts is:
1 viewer donated $150k
1 viewer donated $20k
1 viewer donated $15k
18 viewers donated $1k–$5k
49 viewers donated $10–$500
It's been extremely encouraging to see so many viewers putting such a high value on supporting our mission.
Some comments left by these donors:
"I really want to support you because I think that you are doing really great work to get the word out about this crisis. More people understanding it means more people to help try to solve it. Also, it means more people to reject wildly continuing down the path of AI capability development."
“Doom Debates tackles a pressing human existential risk with the best tools we have: clear thinking and honest discourse.”
"I've always been a fan of Eliezer Yudkowsky, a lot of what he's saying goes over my head sometimes, but at the same time a lot of what he's saying is almost too childish, and he's laughing at his own cleverness a little bit too often and it's hard to make other people take him seriously, I take him completely seriously, I think he's a brilliant genius, but you make his ideas clear and accessible."
"I really love your content Liron. I can't get enough of it."
"I enjoy watching your content much more than watching Netflix stuff and I pay for that. I know you try hard, you expose yourself out there and you don't care about all the hate you are probably receiving. You need to be supported and be heard, because your message is the most important topic everyone should be talking about on the media and at dinner-time (which is not yet the case)"
Someone needs to respond to the constant high-profile dubious claims
Because our civilization has thus far neglected to build a robust forum for high-quality debates on high-stakes issues, there are currently various prominent voices leveraging friendly media platforms to broadcast weak arguments for doubtful claims. We’re missing a platform where someone can challenge their claims and unpack their arguments with enough distribution to be a meaningful part of the same discourse as the original author.
Doom Debates is able to publish independent analysis of x-risk-related claims and arguments to an increasingly large audience, even if the author of the claims declines our invitation to come on the show. For instance, we’ve published articles and episodes critically analyzing:
Ben Horowitz’s backwards conclusion from comparing open source AI to nuclear proliferation
Roger Penrose’s claims about AIs lacking consciousness and Godel’s Theorem
Fresh new ideas need help reaching a mainstream audience
One of the show’s goals is to notice when smart people post important ideas in their corner of the internet and signal-boost them to a larger audience via an interview or debate, e.g.:
These are some of our most popular episodes, and demonstrate how we can speed up the diffusion of ideas from research organizations like MIRI into mainstream awareness.
Use of Funds
We spend $150k/year on production:
Producer salary: $120k
Producer interns and other outside production help: $30k
If we have additional funds, we will also spend them on marketing efforts such as our recent sponsorships of the LessOnline and Manifest conferences.
This doesn't include the value of my (Liron's) time. I have not been drawing any income from Doom Debates in 2024-2025, and commit to also not drawing income from Doom Debates in 2026-2027.
Right now, $50k gets us to the end of 2026.
We wouldn't be able to do this without viewer support. Thanks for partnering with us on the mission to lower P(Doom).
—Liron and Ori
donated $50
donated $100
Liron Shapira
3 days ago
Progress update
What progress have you made since your last update?
New professional studio, "man on the street" episodes, a more consistent pipeline of higher profile guests. Also, we can't help notice that the need for AGI analysis and high-quality debates is increasing fast.
What are your next steps?
Investing in our guest outreach process to land even more prominent guests and snowball our audience size faster, so that we're able to play a more influential role in the discourse.
How can people help?
We're currently funding constrained! Please see more info about donating to the show at https://doomdebates.com/donate
donated $300
donated $500
donated $500
🍓
Charlie Guthmann
about 15 hours ago
@liron https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/5huXea9bB7mtMQbrX/community-polls-on-alignment-controversies-ii-1 I found this quite thought provoking would be interested to see it discussed on stream or with a guest.
donated $3,500
donated $53
donated $50
donated $527
Romain Deléglise
7 days ago
I admire your efforts, to be frank it's looks totally fucked but it's totally worth trying, good job👍
Liron Shapira
7 days ago
@Romain_D The least we can do is have a podcast acknowledging how fucked we are, dignity points as they say :)
donated $527
donated $1,030
🌶
dolethebobdole11
about 1 month ago
Liron, I genuinely admire your principled efforts. Also, it's very difficult to find high quality debates, and I think yours are excellent!
Liron Shapira
about 1 month ago
@dolethebobdole11 Thank you!!! Always great to hear from ppl who get what gap we're trying to fill :)
Btw for Mission Partner access, pls DM me in the https://doomdebates.com/discord server.
donated $1,000
Liron Shapira
2 months ago
@alexs Thanks for your support!!! For Mission Partner access, DM me in the https://doomdebates.com/discord server :)
donated $100
Aashka Patel
4 months ago
Doom Debates brings the right kind of content and packages it in the best possible way. I love watching their videos. I really hope that this project reaches its funding goal. Goodluck, Liron :)
donated $1,000
Liron Shapira
4 months ago
@odie5533 Thanks for your support David, means a lot when ppl go above & beyond!
donated $100
🐻
Joseph Chan
5 months ago
I believe in the mission. I hope people start to wake up, but it seems most people are oblivious.
donated $100
donated $3,500
🥑
Leigh Watson
5 months ago
I believe strongly in the mission of Doom Debates, and I think you're the right person in this role, Liron. Keep up the great work!
donated $50
🦋
David Göckede
6 months ago
Hey Liron, thanks for your work, please keep it up!
Is there a way to donate monthly? I would prefer to give 50-100 bucks a month then doing a big bulk or doing it manually.
Liron Shapira
6 months ago
@DavGoeck Thank you, much appreciated! Hmm good Q, I'll be on the lookout for ways to accept that. For now the only recurring payment I'm set up to accept is the DoomDebates.com paid tier at $10/month, which doesn't unlock any new content, it's just a donation and also helps my Substack metrics.
donated $1,200
donated $1,000
Liron Shapira
7 months ago
@nathanlabenz Thank you, means a lot. Also your show is similarly helpful to the cause!
donated $500
🐹
Jonas Karch
7 months ago
I hope you can help make the average person realize that AI is life-threatening. I feel like this is by far the most important thing to do right now.
donated $3,500
🥑
Leigh Watson
7 months ago
As a parent, I care strongly about the future of humanity. I appreciate the good work that Liron is doing in trying to save the world by informing the public about AI risk.
donated $200
Liron Shapira
11 months ago
Progress update
What progress have you made since your last update?
The show now gets 40k views/month and growing.
More great guests have been coming on: Vitalik Buterin, Gary Marcus, Max Tegmark, Emmett Shear
What are your next steps?
Keep the snowball going of growing the audience and level of guests, to help shape the discourse.
Is there anything others could help you with?
More info about donating to the show at https://doomdebates.com/donate
Liron Shapira
over 1 year ago
Progress update
What progress have you made since your last update?
In the last 6 months we went from 1k views/episode to 5k views/episode and expect to keep growing.
What are your next steps?
Snowball to inviting higher-profile guests and growing faster.
Is there anything others could help you with?
Volunteer help on growth operations could be impactful.
I currently use mostly my own money $250/month to pay contractors to produce clips and YouTube thumbnails. Donations help me invest more into the show and potentially run paid YouTube advertising.
donated $527
donated $20
Orpheus Lummis
over 1 year ago
Liron's interviews are useful contributions to the public discourse and are on a good trajectory. They have potential to engage broader audiences. Additionally, I've personally benefited from them.
donated $20
Michaël Rubens Trazzi
almost 2 years ago
update: I've now thought more about it, watched more videos, and the videos seem to be getting good engagement and liron has been posting these quite regularly, demonstrating his willingness to grow.
I think the "reacting to video" aspect is a niche that is not currently filled and is worth doing.
I don't especially like focusing too much on basic arguments regarding "optimizers" or "paperclips" (mentioned in the Shapiro and Bret Weinstein videos I watched) and would prefer more recent terminology (say discussing things specific to language models / SoTA and how the current paradigm could become risky), but I want to donate some amount now to show some support, possibly adding more later as I get more evidence.
donated $25
ampdot
almost 2 years ago
This seems like a useful platform for researchers at the frontier to share concerns with the broader public directly without needing to first filter through the technology-startup culture complex in a more informal format.
Liron Shapira
almost 2 years ago
@ampdot True. IMO there's not another consistently "high P(doom) AI x-risk" outlet communicating in a mainstream way right now.
(I guess the closest thing right now is either explainer channels like Rob Miles, or podcasts that discuss AI issues where some of them are high-P(doom) guests.)
donated $20
Michaël Rubens Trazzi
almost 2 years ago
I think communicating AI risk through debate with a podcast & youtube channel is valuable. I have seen some episodes of Liron debating with people I'd qualify as "tech optimists" (George Hotz, Theo Jaffe, Guillaume Verdon) and I can confirm that he has the "stamina" and patience to go through these debates (as he mentions here).
My current main reservations are:
- framing it as a "doom debate" or a confrontaional "doomers vs non doomers" which could potentially cause harm (making the movement be seen more like an advesarial apocalyptic cult rather than a technical field)
- one of his debate with Guillaume Verdon (around his startup) might have been counterproductive (he repeated the same question about "inputs / outputs", which I think was a fair question, but this didn't signal to the audience that he was engaging with the actual plan from Guillaume, and was criticized on twitter for that).
A few clarifying questions on the actual text:
Just two months into the project, we're already getting 1k+ views and listens per episode.
How many listens are you getting in the "views and listens"? Is it 1k+ views + listens in average? What is, say, the average watchtime per episode? What is the average view duration (in %)?
We're now at the point where we can convert money into faster audience growth using obvious low-hanging-fruit growth tactics.
What are these "obvious" low-hanging fruit growth tactics?
Plus, the topic of AI risk is growing increasingly mainstream. So I bet the potential audience who wants to consume my content about AI x-risk really is in the millions.
How did you end up with "in the millions" here?
The viewers-per-episode metric will soon hit tens of thousands
What data supports that? What do you mean by soon?
The most likely failure mode is if my content doesn't resonate with a large audience, making it hard to get beyond 25k+ views and listens per episode, such that I give up on the 250k+ views per episode which I currently think is a realistic long-term goal.
When will you decide whether you're in that failure mode or not? Why did you decide on 250k+ views episode as a long-term goal? What makes you think it is a "realistic long-term goal", and what do you mean by "long-term" here?
===
Final note: I think Liron is doing hard work in the space and I think this has the potential to be turned into something impactful. The previous questions were simply to get more clarity on some of the numbers that were mentioned before, and the potential pitfalls I've mentioned in my reservations. I think Liron has proven to have the consistency and patience to hold these debates regularly, and I overall encourage the project, assuming some of the reservations I have are addressed in the future.
Liron Shapira
almost 2 years ago
@michaeltrazzi Thank you for the thoughtful feedback and questions! You clearly have a lot of relevant context as a fellow podcaster, and you're helping me make this project page more informative.
- framing it as a "doom debate" or a confrontaional "doomers vs non doomers" which could potentially cause harm (making the movement be seen more like an advesarial apocalyptic cult rather than a technical field)
Fair point about the name and framing. Another valid criticism of the name is that "doom" is perceived as an unserious outgroup-word for serious policy discussions. My thinking is that until I get to the next order-of-magnitude growth target, my main focus is inspiring passion for the project in myself and my early audience. I find the current name and framing authentic and catchy, and I feel like a lot of the audience is vibing with my overall approach, so I plan to reconsider how to take the next step of the journey at the next order of magnitude.
For instance, let's say we hit the milestone of 50k+ listens per episode, and I'm now optimizing the show toward having regular high-profile guests. In that case, it may be time to rebrand to something more serious-sounding like "AI Safety Roundtable", while bringing along the existing audience that came from earlier iterations.
- one of his debate with Guillaume Verdon (around his startup) might have been counterproductive (he repeated the same question about "inputs / outputs", which I think was a fair question, but this didn't signal to the audience that he was engaging with the actual plan from Guillaume, and was criticized on twitter for that)
Fair enough, I consider that my worst debate and I think you'll find that every episode of Doom Debates is better.
How many listens are you getting in the "views and listens"? Is it 1k+ views + listens in average? What is, say, the average watchtime per episode? What is the average view duration (in %)?
YouTube is the only platform where I'm really doing numbers, reporting over 1k views per recent episode. Substack reports about 60 podcast downloads per episode, and Twitter reports thousands of "views" on my tweets where I post clips and advertise subscribing to the show, neither of which amounts to much, yet 30% of poll respondents on my YouTube channel said they also listen in podcast form. So I figure I can add at least 10% to the YouTube view count to get "views and listens".
YouTube analytics:
25,600 total views since Jun 19 launch. Average watchtime per episode is 13:31, about 15% of an episode length.
5,800 total hours watched.
In last 28 days, there have been 8 episodes averaging 1.4k views per episode, and 70 likes and 83 comments per episode.
An important positive indicator for me, besides the relatively high and growing view counts for a 2-month-old channel, is the passion and enthusiasm of the audience engagement (i.e. likes and comments). This is something I feel qualitatively in the genuine interest and compliments of the commenters, but also can be quantified: Dwarkesh has 218,000 YouTube subscribers compared to my current 640, and his videos have 10-100x more views than mine, yet for all but his top 20% of his videos, his comment counts are actually in the same range as mine (~70 per video).
What are these "obvious" low-hanging fruit growth tactics?
The most obvious way to add a multiplier on the organic growth rate that comes from producing episodes is to post each episode's content and assorted clips across YouTube, TikTok, X, LinkedIn, Instagram, Facebook, and various forums and Subreddits where it's relevant.
Plus, the topic of AI risk is growing increasingly mainstream. So I bet the potential audience who wants to consume my content about AI x-risk really is in the millions.
How did you end up with "in the millions" here?
Rob Miles is a similar kind of mainstream communicator in the same space as me, and has 250k views per episode. AI news is the hottest topic in tech news, and the majority of random respondents in various surveys say they're worried about various serious threats from AI. I figure millions of people are interested in tech news, and millions are interested in learning about whether we're all about to die.
The viewers-per-episode metric will soon hit tens of thousands
What data supports that? What do you mean by soon?
I'm aiming to hit 10,000 subscribers by end of this year. It'll require one or two extra-popular episodes. I see many opportunities to create such hit episodes, most straightforwardly by creating thorough takedowns of popular names in the AI non-doomer space, such as Marc Andreessen.
Every time I make an episode debating or reacting to content from someone who has their own related audience, it helps get more subscribers, and sometimes disproportionately so (e.g. David Shapiro has 200x more subscribers who have recently been coming over to my channel since we talk about similar issues and now I'm reacting directly to his content).
I expect Doom Debates growth on YouTube will be faster than most channels because the issues I talk about are unusually engaging and polarizing, and many of my subscribers are aligned with the show's mission, and are motivated to share and help it grow. For the next 10-100x growth, I'd guess it plays out as a compounding exponential growth / snowball effect where the algorithm keeps promoting my videos more, rather than hitting a plateau.
The most likely failure mode is if my content doesn't resonate with a large audience, making it hard to get beyond 25k+ views and listens per episode, such that I give up on the 250k+ views per episode which I currently think is a realistic long-term goal.
When will you decide whether you're in that failure mode or not? Why did you decide on 250k+ views episode as a long-term goal? What makes you think it is a "realistic long-term goal", and what do you mean by "long-term" here?
If it's stuck in the 25k range for 6 months despite creating various types of content that I think should be relevant to a large audience, I'll be pretty surprised. I would check if the average level of engagement and passion in the comments is similar to what it it is now. If not, figure out why not and make sure I'm still communicating with an appealing mainstream format. If yes, try other growth channels since it could be specific to one platform's algorithm.
If the viewership goes 12 months without a 50% yr/yr increase prior to the 250k subscriber mark, then the project will not have gone as hoped & planned. I may work on it less since the ROI is lower than expected, or I may keep chugging along and be open to serving a smaller niche, especially if I'm creating episodes that serve as a high-quality reference for various topics.
Thanks again for your thoughtful questions and overall encouragement!
donated $20
Michaël Rubens Trazzi
almost 2 years ago
@liron Thanks for the quick & detailed answers.
Since I wrote that comment I've watched the beginning of most of your current videos, and I'd like to add a few updates for me:
I did look at the engagement (comments & likes) on current videos and it does seem like a positive signal for having a strong core audience. I guess to get the full picture it would be good to have the number of dislikes to see if it's just that the video topics are controversial, but from the comments it seems people do seem to value your work, which is again a good sign.
it seems that most of the content is "Liron react" rather than "Doom debate", meaning you're reacting to what someone said instead of debating. I think debates are harder to do since you'd need to have people agree to debate you and schedule it, and it would also be more interesting to watch. But reacts are things that don't exist in the space so fill the "commentary" niche and is possibly a way to get a debate afterwards.
the production quality is quite good on your side, though say when you're reacting to david shapiro he his only inside a circle (i guess for copyright issues?) which I think could slightly be improved
Right now, given your channel is quite new and the engagement, I think I've updated towards the potential growth you're described being possible.
I guess last conflicted thoughts I'd have are on the theory of change. If say more david shapiro folks watch your reacts / debates, or more generally people do understand the basic arguments for why "doom" is likely, what do you expect them to do as a result?
My understanding is that your audience would most likely not be that technical, so the goal is potentially to have people more concerned about AI risk to say shift the public opinion on AI legislation, or do call to actions for the PauseAI movement? If so would be good to have data on that (eg a form on how much their perspectives have shifted or how many PauseAI discord signups from your channel).
Anyway, thanks again for the thorough answer. I'll try watching a full Liron react and potentially see your final reply to this before coming up with a donation decision.
Liron Shapira
almost 2 years ago
@michaeltrazzi You're right, I've been doing a lot of Liron Reacts lately for a few reasons:
It's relatively easy for me to crank these out: The structure is predetermined, I just go through an existing piece of content
I can have more prominent people featured in my content and dive into their positions in detail, without having to convince them to debate me, good for attracting new viewers and YouTube keyword SEO
It often lets me give higher-quality arguments and explanations than in a debate, because I don't have to argue in realtime (though I can mitigate this issue for debates by doing a post-debate recap episode, which I did after debating Robin Hanson)
I'm getting frequent listener feedback like "Yesss I was hoping you'd review this", because many people who follow the AI media space are in a similar position to me, feeling frustrated that the doom issue gets ignored / misrepresented / badly argued against on popular podcasts multiple times per week, and they end up hate-watching these other episodes, but now they can love-watch Doom Debates instead (or in addition to), to follow the conversation from a "taking doom seriously" viewpoint
Because of these factors, in the short term, I'll probably do something like 2 reaction episodes or other solo explainer episodes per week, plus 1 debate episode every 2 weeks. (FYI I'm planning for a debate episode next week around SB 1047 where it's me moderating two other people debating pro vs. anti.)
As we progress from the humble origin of being a niche community of passionate doomers looking out at the larger discourse, to becoming a forum that increasingly-prominent people come to participate in, the best way to create value is to raise society's ability to have high-quality debates about AGI, similar to that one AGI MunkDebate last year, though hopefully even better quality than that. That's the endgame I'm targeting.
Along the way, it's always a continuum where the more high-quality guests we can attract who are willing to debate their position, the more we can ditch reaction episodes, because we can go straight to the source. (Case in point, my David Shapiro Part II reaction episode was originally supposed to be a debate with him until he changed his mind.)
the production quality is quite good on your side, though say when you're reacting to david shapiro he his only inside a circle (i guess for copyright issues?) which I think could slightly be improved
I think that particular issue is just a weird isolated case where David has a weird-looking video that I clipped unaltered, but thx for the feedback and in general I will keep improving the production quality :)
I guess last conflicted thoughts I'd have are on the theory of change. If say more david shapiro folks watch your reacts / debates, or more generally people do understand the basic arguments for why "doom" is likely, what do you expect them to do as a result?
I expect listeners who are interested in the content of folks like David Shapiro to hear both of our perspectives (David's and mine), and hopefully update toward thinking that the "taking AI doom seriously" perspective makes more sense.
I don't consider it my goal to change the mind of the people I'm debating against, because I don't have high hopes that such a goal is achievable in more than a small fraction of cases. Nevertheless, I expect to act very similarly to someone who seeks to change the mind of those people (e.g. use Double Crux as my debate technique rather than rhetoric), because part of what I aim to do is be a social institution for high-quality debate, which starts with modeling to viewers what high-quality debate looks like, and continues into being a Munkdebates-like forum that referees public debates.
My understanding is that your audience would most likely not be that technical, so the goal is potentially to have people more concerned about AI risk to say shift the public opinion on AI legislation, or do call to actions for the PauseAI movement? If so would be good to have data on that (eg a form on how much their perspectives have shifted or how many PauseAI discord signups from your channel)
That's right, it's an important success metric that this has an effect of increasing support for things like AI safety legislation and grassroots PauseAI protests. I will make sure to run surveys on that, measure referrals to PauseAI discord signups, etc.
Thanks again. I hope you and others keep the questions & comments coming.