This is a link post.

So this post is an argument that multi-decade timelines are reasonable, and the key cruxes that Ege Erdil has with most AI safety people who believe in short timelines are due to the following set of beliefs:

Ege Erdil don't believe that trends exist that require AI to automate everything in only 2-3 years.
Ege Erdil doesn't believe that the software-only singularity is likely to happen, and this is perhaps the most important crux he has with AI people like @Daniel Kokotajlo who believe that a software-only singularity is likely.
Ege Erdil expects Moravec's paradox to bite hard once AI agents are made in a big way.

This is a pretty important crux, because if this is true, a lot more serial research agendas like Infra-Bayes research, Natural Abstractions work, and human intelligence augmentation can work more often, and also it means that political [...]

---

First published:
April 27th, 2025

Source:
https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/xxxK9HTBNJvBY2RJL/untitled-draft-m847

Linkpost URL:
https://epoch.ai/gradient-updates/the-case-for-multi-decade-ai-timelines

---

Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO.

[Linkpost] “The case for multi-decade AI timelines” by Noosphere89

LessWrong (30+ Karma)

[Linkpost] “The case for multi-decade AI timelines” by Noosphere89