Explore selected, predominantly US and English-language AI debate. The three areas are editorial groupings. Several primary placements remain contested.
Select a node to highlight its neighbours in this graph. Select an edge for its meaning and evidence. Drag and zoom to explore.
This research map explores three analytical areas: Doomers, Accelerationists and Centrists. It connects selected people and organisations to public positions, shared ideas, commercial relationships and possible incentives.
Placements are editorial interpretations of selected public material. Each area contains differing views; primary and secondary associations capture some of that overlap. Amodei explicitly rejects doomerism. His placement and the primary ranking of frontier labs remain under editorial discussion. The Centrist area combines technical scepticism and structural ethical criticism.
Each relationship has a rationale, dated supporting references, evidence locators and an evidence status. Source publication and audit dates serve different purposes. Stated positions and documented connections are distinguished from analytical readings and hypotheses. Possible incentives describe plausible contextual influences; their causal role remains uncertain. Historical proposals and later financing disclosures appear separately. Committed capital, cash payment and deployed infrastructure require distinct evidence.
The latest edition contains 25 people and 7 organisations, concentrated in US technology and English-language debate. The project’s global title describes its intended scope as coverage grows. The release picker preserves published editions, and the change log distinguishes new evidence from corrections and editorial interpretation. Analysis of changes in personal views remains a later phase. Historical source dates bound the claims shown here.
Built using Neo4j and published as a versioned interactive snapshot. Select an edge to inspect its meaning and sources. Corrections can be raised with Shane Cooper through the LinkedIn post sharing this map, identifying the relationship and supporting evidence.
Grey actors have placement under review. Their sourced connections remain available. Group names describe editorial areas; individual self-identification may differ. The sample is a curated selection of voices, with coverage shaped by available evidence.
Source dates describe the evidence. Recorded dates describe when it entered this project. Publication dates describe approved releases. Older records have day precision; unknown dates stay unspecified.