In light of the recent news from Mechanize/Epoch and the community discussion it sparked, I'd like to open a conversation about a question some of us grapple with: What constitutes a net-positive AI startup from an AI safety perspective, and what steps can founders take to demonstrate goodwill and navigate the inherent pressures?

This feels like an important conversation to have because AI safety seems to have been increasingly encouraging people in the community to build startups (due to a lack of funding, potentially higher ceiling for society-wide impact, etc.). I've thought a lot about this, and have been going back and forth on this for the past three years. You get constant whiplash.

"You're building an evals org? Isn't that just doing the homework for the labs? And besides, none of it will scale to ASI. You'll just safety-wash labs along the way."
"You're doing jailbreaks? This [...]

The original text contained 1 footnote which was omitted from this narration.

---

First published:
April 18th, 2025

Source:
https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/o3sEHE8cqQ5hcqgkG/what-makes-an-ai-startup-net-positive-for-safety

---

Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO.

“What Makes an AI Startup ‘Net Positive’ for Safety?” by jacquesthibs

LessWrong (30+ Karma)

“What Makes an AI Startup ‘Net Positive’ for Safety?” by jacquesthibs