In the context of super-intelligence, “safe” has been perfectly well defined for decades: “won't ultimately result in everyone dying or worse”.

You can call it hubris if you like, but don't pretend like it's not clear.

It’s not, when most discussion around AI safety in the last few years has boiled down to “we need to make sure LLMs never respond with anything that a stereotypical Berkeley progressive could find offensive”.

So when you switch gears and start using safety properly, it would be nice to have that clarified.