Anywhere I can listen to or read your debates with “doomers”?
We share a strong interest in economics, but apparently not in philosophy. I’m curious if this is true, or you just didn’t talk about it in the places I looked.
What do you think about my worries around AGI being inherently centralizing and/or offense-favoring and/or anti-democratic (aside from above problems, how would elections work when minds can be copied at little cost)? Seems like the free world “prevailing” on AGI might well be a Pyrrhic victory unless we can also solve these follow-up problems, but you don’t address them.
More generally, do you have a longer term vision of how your proposal leads to a good outcome for our lightcone, avoiding all the major AI-related x-risks and s-risks?
Why are you not in favor of an AI pause treaty with other major nations? (You only talk about unilateral pause in the section “AGI Realism”.) China is currently behind in chips and AI and it seems hard to surpass the entire West in a chips/AI race, so why would they not go for an AI pause treaty to preserve the status quo instead of risking a US-led intelligence explosion (not to mention x-risks)?
Re 6: at 1:24:30 in the Dwarkesh podcast Leopold proposes the US making an agreement with China to slow down (/pause) after the US has a 100GW cluster and is clearly going to win the race to build AGI to buy time to get things right during the “volatile period” before AGI.
Some questions for @leopold.
Anywhere I can listen to or read your debates with “doomers”?
We share a strong interest in economics, but apparently not in philosophy. I’m curious if this is true, or you just didn’t talk about it in the places I looked.
What do you think about my worries around AIs doing philosophy? See this post or my discussion about it with Jan Leike.
What do you think about my worries around AGI being inherently centralizing and/or offense-favoring and/or anti-democratic (aside from above problems, how would elections work when minds can be copied at little cost)? Seems like the free world “prevailing” on AGI might well be a Pyrrhic victory unless we can also solve these follow-up problems, but you don’t address them.
More generally, do you have a longer term vision of how your proposal leads to a good outcome for our lightcone, avoiding all the major AI-related x-risks and s-risks?
Why are you not in favor of an AI pause treaty with other major nations? (You only talk about unilateral pause in the section “AGI Realism”.) China is currently behind in chips and AI and it seems hard to surpass the entire West in a chips/AI race, so why would they not go for an AI pause treaty to preserve the status quo instead of risking a US-led intelligence explosion (not to mention x-risks)?
Re 6: at 1:24:30 in the Dwarkesh podcast Leopold proposes the US making an agreement with China to slow down (/pause) after the US has a 100GW cluster and is clearly going to win the race to build AGI to buy time to get things right during the “volatile period” before AGI.
That link gives me a “Sorry, you don’t have access to this draft”
I second questions 1, 5, and 6 after listening to the Dwarkesh interview.