The problem faced by the Harvard Corporation [elite failure]

A NYTimes article on the Harvard Corporation, "the secretive, powerful group that runs Harvard." An astute comment by Sure at Marginal Revolution:

The problem for the board of Harvard is going to be the problem for most any elite institution - it is the sort of position that is used as a prize for status hierarchies among the folks who already have everything.

This means that concerns for the board are overwhelmingly going to personal brand management. And the constituency that matters will not be the public, Harvard grads, or even in the Harvard professorate. It will be the folks who might be able to snub millionaires and disinvite them from the finer things in life.

And once you get into such situations, be they left wing or right wing, you have a very hard time avoiding signaling spirals. After all, there are plenty of folks who want the social cachet of these positions and an effective cudgel to get it will always be to signify greater loyalty to "the cause" than the current incumbents. Which means that the board will be good at playing status games and terrified of enforcing standards in a way that might make them look bad.

The key reason behind a huge amount of elite failure, be it in the Catholic Church, Harvard, the ACLU, or the Republican Party is that the normal feedbacks cease mattering as much as the feedbacks from other folks at the top. And that very rarely reflects mundane practical concerns, let alone popular norms.

I believe we see a similar problem at the top of the AI Guru hierarchy. Whatever the actual prospects of rogue AI treating humankind as feedstock for paperclip manufacturing, the prospect of an AI apocalypse garners attention and clicks, thus generating pressure to get with the apocalypse program. Remember, it is rare for even elite academics and researchers to get space in The New York Times and other highly visible venues. Once you're there, gotta' stay there, gotta' generate those clicks.