I mean, yes, but so does the author of this article. It's literally his business. The article is, in part, an advertisement for what he sells.
I disagree with Yudkowsky on almost everything and I think the philosophical movement he co-founded is a pox on the SF Bay Area tech culture, but I don't think we can deny him credibility that's comparable to the credibility of the author of this article (who, as I understand, is a young guy who spent some time at OpenAI). They both know what they're talking about and both are motivated to reach specific conclusions.
The author also publishes research and contributes to the field. This is the primary difference. Yudkowsky ONLY tells stories.
He cofounded the Machine Intelligence Research Institute, an organization focused on AI alignment, in 2000, way way before it was a trendy topic.
He's also partially responsible for popularizing ideas such as the orthogonality thesis and instrumental convergence.
> Isn't he just some random dude on the internet?
Not really, most random dudes on the internet were not researching AI alignment in 2000.
> Why do people care what he says?
Many people were introduced to the concept of AI alignment thanks to him, so they are naturally interested in reading his reaction to progress in the field.
For the rest, is he just an AI influencer? One that predated his topic of interest, but still just an influencer?
Not directly. Exotic decision theories were a dead end; as far as I know nobody outside of MIRI even cares about them. Certainly they’re not relevant to interpretability in the context of this thread.
https://www.semanticscholar.org/author/Eliezer-Yudkowsky/254...