Unverified50% confidenceOpinionExact time
Everyday harms—such as subtle social bias, addictive design, and systemic effects on vulnerable groups—are hard to quantify and hard to turn into PR material, and are therefore excluded from safety assessments.
1
Sources
50%
Confidence
Long-term
Relevance
10/26/2026
First Seen
Sources
Related Entities
Related Claims
UnverifiedThe core difficulty in evaluating prosociality lies in the fragility of norms: human moral intuitions are highly context-dependent, and the same behavior may shift from prosocial to harmful in different contexts.74% similarUnverifiedKey variables in fields such as social science, epidemiology, and economics (e.g., income, exposure dose, attitude scales) often have limited measurement precision and are more susceptible to this phenomenon.72% similarUnverifiedSome researchers believe that existential risk has been overhyped, and that more worthy of attention are practical issues such as algorithmic bias, privacy violations, and employment disruption.72% similarUnverifiedIndirect prompt injection is more harmful because the victim is completely unaware of the malicious content.71% similarUnverifiedAlgorithmic bias and privacy erosion are diffuse harms, not manifested as single measurable explosive events, but producing social impact through long-term, large-scale, low-intensity differential treatment or data accumulation.70% similar
Cite This Claim
Stable URI
https://kongchang.com/claim/1099736API
curl https://kongchang.com/api/v1/knowledge/claims/1099736MCP
get_claim(id=1099736)