This week’s Paper Club is all about AI safety. Not the headlines, but the science. AI safety has been a research field for decades, with its own conferences, methods, and a track record in systems like aircraft collision avoidance, where the standard is one catastrophic failure per billion flight hours. We'll hear from @ClarkBarrett7 and Mykel Kochenderfer ( @aiprof_mykel ), Stanford professors and co-directors of the Stanford Center for AI Safety. Together with @FrancoisChauba1 , they break down the OpenAI–Hugging Face incident, how formal verification can mathematically prove properties of code, how aircraft safety techniques are being adapted to language models, and why AI may need its own NTSB. 00:00 - Science fiction vs. science fact 04:32 - Engineering problem, or P(doom) 06:04 - What actually happened at Hugging Face 07:53 - Where "10% in 10 years" comes from 11:21 - The real risk: open weights in the wrong hands 17:25 - Clark Barrett: when AI met automated reasoning 20:35 - CSLib: proving code correct in Lean 24:32 - From English spec to verified code in one click 27:55 - Mykel Kochenderfer: how do we know a system is safe 32:11 - Adaptive stress testing, from aircraft to LLMs 36:57 - Verifying neural networks 40:30 - Runtime monitoring and BetterBench 43:53 - Panel: reacting to the past three weeks 45:55 - An NTSB for AI 52:18 - Is cybersecurity solvable in five years 55:00 - If you were CISO of Bank of America 1:03:06 - The Swiss cheese model 1:05:43 - Audience Q&A 🔗 View on Twitter
▶ 打开视频地址
← 返回归档
查看 X 原文帖子详情
查看 Markdown 内容
--- tweet_id: "2111472682571374601" author: "ycombinator" published_at: "2026-10-17T15:01:31+00:00" source_url: "https://x.com/ycombinator/status/2111472682571374601" --- This week’s Paper Club is all about AI safety. Not the headlines, but the science. AI safety has been a research field for decades, with its own conferences, methods, and a track record in systems like aircraft collision avoidance, where the standard is one catastrophic failure per billion flight hours. We'll hear from [@ClarkBarrett7](https://x.com/ClarkBarrett7) and Mykel Kochenderfer ([@aiprof\_mykel](https://x.com/aiprof_mykel)), Stanford professors and co-directors of the Stanford Center for AI Safety. Together with [@FrancoisChauba1](https://x.com/FrancoisChauba1), they break down the OpenAI–Hugging Face incident, how formal verification can mathematically prove properties of code, how aircraft safety techniques are being adapted to language models, and why AI may need its own NTSB. 00:00 - Science fiction vs. science fact 04:32 - Engineering problem, or P(doom) 06:04 - What actually happened at Hugging Face 07:53 - Where "10% in 10 years" comes from 11:21 - The real risk: open weights in the wrong hands 17:25 - Clark Barrett: when AI met automated reasoning 20:35 - CSLib: proving code correct in Lean 24:32 - From English spec to verified code in one click 27:55 - Mykel Kochenderfer: how do we know a system is safe 32:11 - Adaptive stress testing, from aircraft to LLMs 36:57 - Verifying neural networks 40:30 - Runtime monitoring and BetterBench 43:53 - Panel: reacting to the past three weeks 45:55 - An NTSB for AI 52:18 - Is cybersecurity solvable in five years 55:00 - If you were CISO of Bank of America 1:03:06 - The Swiss cheese model 1:05:43 - Audience Q&A [🔗 View on Twitter](https://x.com/ycombinator/status/2111472682571374601/video/1) ## 视频地址 - [视频 1](https://video.twimg.com/amplify_video/2111470083281436672/vid/avc1/3840x2160/TElYxqr_9_u2tLZM.mp4?tag=29)