I feel blessed to have gotten so much new engagement from accounts that this AI risk is a psyop. I have been deeply involved in both technical AI research and AI risk reduction efforts for over a decade, so personally I'm confident it's not a psyop. But I can understand why people who lack this kind of direct, first hand experience might think otherwise, and also why they would not automatically trust me or others claiming to know better. If you sincerely believe this is a psyop, but are open to changing their mind, I'm interested in hearing more from you! What exactly do you mean when you say it's a psyop? Which claims do you disbelieve? Which people do you think are involved in the psyop, and in what capacity? What sort of evidence would change your mind? What sort of evidence do you have that you think might change my (or others') minds? Do you know anyone personally who disagrees with you, and have you tried having an in-depth conversation with them to try and get to the bottom of it? What do you find most suspicious? And are there any alternative explanations for it that you've considered? What things do you observe that still don't add up or that conflict with the theory that this is a psyop? Do you think AI is dangerous? In what ways? What solutions would you propose? What are your feelings on AI and AI policy in general? Do you use AI? What do you use it for? Do you remember when you became convinced it was a psyop? What convinced you? Is there anything you'd like to tell me or ask me?