Common Good Lens: Using the common good lens, we need to think about the outcomes for all members of the community. I believe that pacing is still the correct thing to do. Of course, it will only work if all AI companies agree to it. If there are some that do not agree, they could use AI to do harm to some people. No matter which lens you use, there needs to be care taken to make sure that we do not allow AI to grow faster than we can control and understand it. There must be some sort of third party monitoring.

Utilitarian Lens: Pacing AI could definitely delay many potential benefits of AI. Economic, medical, and others. However, pacing AI can limit or prevent a lot of risks. I believe one of the biggest risks we are taking is losing control of the current AI systems. To AI itself, but more importantly to those who wish to do harm to others. Using the Utilitarian Lens, we must think about what would create the best outcome for the most people. A cost/benefit analysis would be very beneficial to make this decision. Not just financial cost but the cost of slowing progress on so many fronts. On the other hand, pacing will only truly be helpful if there are agreements in place from all AI companies to do the same. Especially from countries that would like to get ahead of the US and cause us harm. Whether it is economic harm or biological harm or something else, we may not be able to recover. Amodei states "it's my worry that in 6-12 months such a swarm could be capable of taking over the entire internet" shows how big of a risk we would be taking by continuing on our current course. We need to take the time to make sure AI is safe for the public.