{
  "video_id": "reddit_1wbxq7y",
  "channel_slug": "singularity",
  "channel_handle": "r/singularity",
  "title": "r/singularity's moderation policy on existential risk is at odds with its original mission",
  "url": "https://www.reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1wbxq7y/rsingularitys_moderation_policy_on_existential/",
  "external_url": null,
  "upload_date": "20260909",
  "published_at": "2026-09-09T20:43:12+00:00",
  "transcript": "**Edit:**  u/Apollo24_ replied and addressed some of my concerns [here.](https://www.reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1wbxq7y/rsingularitys_moderation_policy_on_existential/p8tr9jk/)\n\n(*Caveat up front:*  I think the mod team has been doing a reasonably good job in most respects and appreciate their work keeping the subreddit chugging along.  This is a disagreement, it's not a rant.)\n\n[A recent post](https://www.reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1wb7ml2/anthropic_researcher_quits_over_ai_safety_fears_i/) (not by me) about the resignation of a prominent Anthropic researcher got over 1300 upvotes and 500 comments.  It was deleted by the moderation team.  One of the moderators responded in a later thread (I appreciate the reply) [and explained why:](https://www.reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1wbdu71/anthropic_alignment_lead_warns_theres_10_chance/p8p5ylq/)\n\n>We will cover risks that actually occur, like the hacking incident. I have no respect for claims of future risk that might occur, such as this title said \"10% risk of human extinction,\" that's silly.\n\nI am concerned that this will become a point of increasing friction in the future given the subreddit's stated purpose, the beliefs and interests of its userbase, and recent events.  **I think that banning discussion of x-risk is strongly at odds with r/singularity's stated purpose, sidebar, wiki, and general ethos.**\n\nPer the sidebar, this is r/singularity:\n\n>A subreddit committed to intelligent understanding of the hypothetical moment in time when artificial intelligence progresses to the point of greater-than-human intelligence, radically changing civilization. This community studies the creation of superintelligence— and predict it will happen in the near future, and that ultimately, deliberate action ought to be taken to ensure that the Singularity benefits humanity.\n\nThe sidebar links to subreddits about transhumanism, cyborgism, and space colonization.  The wiki has entire sections devoted to longevity escape velocity, cryonics, mind uploading, nanotechnology, and full-dive virtual reality.\n\nAre these topics \"silly\"?  They certainly haven't \"actually occurred\" yet!  *All of them* are \"claims of future [things] that might occur\".  I think they're at least as \"silly\" as AI killing everyone, given the number of serious researchers, organizations, companies, and recently politicians who are now talking about the latter.  But banning discussion of them would obviously destroy r/singularity.  They're a part of the sub.\n\nMore importantly, **the sidebar and wiki are totally unambiguous that x-risk has been a central subreddit topic from the beginning.**\n\nThree of the five links under \"Resources\" are MIRI, LessWrong, and FHI.  The first text you see on [MIRI's landing page](https://intelligence.org) says:\n\n>The AI industry is racing toward a precipice.\n\n>The default consequence of the creation of artificial superintelligence (ASI) is human extinction.\n\n>Our survival depends on delaying the creation of ASI, as soon as we can, for as long as necessary.\n\nThose familiar know that the average user on LessWrong has similar beliefs (the top shortform post [praises](https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/DDtEnmGhNdJYpEfaG/joseph-miller-s-shortform?commentId=zzvCwNedTqGxpEyvf) the resignation), and that FHI was founded to focus on existential risks and typically listed AI as their #1 concern.\n\nAnd check the [subreddit wiki.](https://www.reddit.com/r/singularity/wiki/index)  The second link is to a classic Wait But Why post that's well-known on this sub.  [The second half makes the case for being worried about existential risk from AI.](https://waitbutwhy.com/2015/01/artificial-intelligence-revolution-2.html)  Links 3, 4, and 5 are MIRI, LessWrong, and FHI (again).  The reading list contains Superintelligence, The Age of Em, The Precipice, and What We Owe the Future, all of which discuss AI risk at length.\n\nEverything that this subreddit is about points toward both radically good and radically bad futures being fair discussion topics.  Banning discussion of the latter is inconsistent with this subreddit's mission.\n\nI don't want r/singularity to be turned into r-slash-another-sub-which-shall-not-be-named and ban all talk of possible downsides.  I don't want it to turn into r-slash-yet-another-sub-which-shall-not-be-named that downvotes excitement about future technology and dogpiles anything that doesn't feed the bubble narrative.  The mods have done a great job avoiding both pitfalls so far.  But I also don't want there to be a disconnect between the mods and the users that turns into extra work for them, bans and removed posts, and all kinds of other drama.\n\nI would like to ask the mod team to **please allow discussion of x-risk.**  Again, I appreciate their work keeping the subreddit going.  But this policy is a misstep.\n\nTagging the mods out of courtesy:  u/Anenome5, u/Anen-o-me, u/DnDNecromantic, u/Apollo24_, u/abrownn, u/Vailhem.\n\n\n\n--- Top Comments ---\n\n\n[66 upvotes] X-Risk is central to the effective altruism side of the singularity discussion. Preventing this to be discussed would make this sub just another r/accelerate.\n\nOn another note most of the posts here are posts about big breakthroughs that could happen somewhere in the far or near future. Only in recent months/ the beginning of this year have actual advances instead of the advance towards them taken the first place.\n\nSo in a sense most of the posts here are vague predictions about the future.\n\n[46 upvotes] Talking about x risk isn't doomerism.\n\nWhy does the concept of UBI exist?\n\nWhy are AI companies always going on about safety?\n\nWhy are there bills to ban AI superintelligence?\n\nThe whole point is for humanity to move carefully into the singularity and avoid traps. The whole point of the singularity is to unleash immense power and potential. Power and potential that can destroy as well as create.\n\nTaking the singularity seriously means taking its governance seriously.\n\n[38 upvotes] AI has insane risks associated with it and it should ABSOLUTELY be allowed to talk about.\n\n[26 upvotes] I think the spectrum analogy between the two subs is absolutely fair and should helps the mods find the balance. \n\nI share OPs fear and echo their sentiment. A lot of people are brushing a fair reasonable enquiry into safety measures as marketing stunts. \n\nA credible source flagging concerns rightfully does deserve a discussion. Especially claims of civilisation ending events within the decade.\n\nI would urge discussions, repetitive they maybe, especially after new model releases. Which will soon be weekly. \n\nSpeedrunning alignment is a choice these companies are actively making. We should absolutely talk about it. \n\n[24 upvotes] Yeah from one mod to another: you dont get to choose whats in the community based on if you respect or agree with or believe the claim. What matters is that the content is relevant and put forth in good faith.\n\n“I don’t like it” is just power tripping ",
  "transcript_chars": 6989,
  "ingested_at": "2026-09-10T01:30:20.054310+00:00",
  "source": "reddit",
  "yt_meta": {
    "score": 154,
    "upvote_ratio": 0.83,
    "num_comments": 84,
    "author": "Tinac4",
    "is_self": true
  }
}