Why do we need social singularity? A mechanism-based critique of gradual scenarios in AI existential-risk discourse
arXiv:2608.03904v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: This paper critiques recent gradual and cumulative AI existential-risk scenarios, arguing that, despite their substantive contributions, they remain insufficiently sociologically specified. In particular, these scenarios lack a reflexive perspective, retain a largely technologically deterministic structure, and underestimate the role of collective agency and other social processes. As a result, they also discount the possibility of major social con
Record details
Published: 5 August 2026
Source: arXiv cs.CY
Category: Research
Topics: Safety & alignment
Retrieved: 5 August 2026
Related evidence
These records share source-supplied organisations, an exact publisher byline, automatic topics or regions. The reason is shown on every link; related does not mean supporting, agreeing with or verifying this record.
Transplanting, inverting, and preventing a misalignment persona: method-conditional emergent misalignment in Qwen2.5
arXiv cs.CY · 5 August 2026
Beyond Simulations: What 20,000 Real Conversations Reveal About Mental Health AI Safety
arXiv cs.CY · 5 August 2026
The Evolutionary Origin of Values: implications for AI alignment, sentience and existential risk
arXiv cs.CY · 5 August 2026
AI Alignment and Fiduciary Obligation
arXiv cs.CY · 5 August 2026
A Counterexample to Fourier Alignment in Single-Neuron Modular Addition
arXiv cs.LG · 5 August 2026
A Counterexample to Fourier Alignment in Single-Neuron Modular Addition
arXiv cs.LG · 5 August 2026
How to cite this record
ethics.ai (5 August 2026), “Why do we need social singularity? A mechanism-based critique of gradual scenarios in AI existential-risk discourse,” evidence record 16194, https://ethics.ai/record/16194 (originally published by arXiv cs.CY).
Use and limitations
This page is a stable index and citation surface for a source record. ethics.ai did not author the underlying report and has not independently verified every claim. Automatic topics may be imperfect. For consequential use, quote and cite the original publisher.