This is going to be a nerdier article than usual. It's a response to Anton Leicht's blog post “Press Play To Continue”. I disagree with much of it and think it's not very well argued.

Going section-by-section, Leicht's claims are:

AI is going pretty damn well all things considered. The argument has two parts:
1. It implicitly models pausing AI as resampling from a fixed distribution of possible AI development timelines.
2. It argues the current situation is better than average, so resampling is a bad idea.
3. Specifically the arguments that things are going well are:
  1. Minimal compute overhang
  2. Multipolarity
  3. Liberal democracies control the supply chain
Pausing AI isn’t and won’t be popular among centrist politicians, only among the more radical wings of both parties, and this makes it unlikely to get passed.
A “second best” pause is more likely, and would be worse than nothing.
1. It would be unilateral.
2. It would not cater to x-risk concerns, and thus will lack critical pieces like e.g. export controls or limits on internal deployment.
Proposals to pause AI don’t expand the Overton window in a helpful way [...]

---

Outline:

(03:29) Response to the arguments

(08:31) General reflections

---

First published:
April 14th, 2026

Source:
https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/HofdmpSHbthzZDFZH/contra-leicht-on-ai-pauses

---

Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO.

“Contra Leicht on AI Pauses” by David Scott Krueger (formerly: capybaralet)

LessWrong (30+ Karma)

“Contra Leicht on AI Pauses” by David Scott Krueger (formerly: capybaralet)