Mastodon Feed
It feels like if you're entering a public debate, you have to perform a level of openness to be taken seriously. Someone who asserts their position while refusing to acknowledge the public consensus seems dogmatic, unresponsive to evidence.
But you can demonstrate this openness in other ways. "I'm open to evidence that 'AI' might be a net benefit to society, even given its enormous downsides, but right now, after so much evidence to the contrary that's an extraordinary claim"