Utilitarian Lens: One of the potential benefits that we may lose in pacing or delaying AI development is the creation of new drugs to prevent disease. Research shows it takes on average 10-15 years to develop a new drug that can be ready for patient use, and by slowing the development of AI, we could be slowing the development of these drugs when it already takes so long in the first place. On the contrary, slowing the growth of AI could be beneficial to saving the enviroment. The constant creation of new AI technology needs large data centers to help power it, and these data centers take tons of water and invade the forests and parks that were once there. If we slow the progress of AI, we could potentially cut back of the number of data centers needed until we can develop more laws and regulations for them. Before I can make a conclusive statement that slowing development causes more good than harm, I'd have to do research into the major fields that benefit from AI technology like medicine, and ask professionals in those fields on their opinion of slowing the progress of the AI they use. I highlighted what I believe is an assumption Amodei is making that also affects my judgement aswell. He actually should have a bias towards speeding up the development of AI because of its help in curing him of an early stage of cancer, yet he still takes the opposite stance. It seems he's not letting his personal bias get in the way of what he believes to be right. Hearing how AI has helped save lives does affect how I feel about this specific branch of its use as seen in my earlier comment, yet like Amodei, I'm trying to look at things objectively. If you apply the Care Ethics Lens to this same argument, you have to be wary of the patients this decision may affect if you slow AI's development, as it does have a positive use in the medical field.