Ah, he didn’t realize he was getting signal boosted and edited after he got a bunch of inquiries. Under the old wording, I didn’t think they had no alignment teams, but I read it as ‘a new alignment team.’ It makes sense under Google’s general structure to have multiples, in fact it would be weird if you didn’t.
I don’t even know if the clarifying edit is new, since that’s substack and not github or wikipedia, where one can see the history of edits.
But a new comment was posted 22 hours ago on that substack post, https://mistaketheory.substack.com/p/new-role-agi-alignment-research, perhaps there will be a response from the author (and perhaps the clarifying edit is related to this substack post becoming more known lately, via this post by Zvi or via other channels).
The blog post linked says it’s from August. Is there something new I’m missing?
Ah, he didn’t realize he was getting signal boosted and edited after he got a bunch of inquiries. Under the old wording, I didn’t think they had no alignment teams, but I read it as ‘a new alignment team.’ It makes sense under Google’s general structure to have multiples, in fact it would be weird if you didn’t.
It’s a good question.
I don’t even know if the clarifying edit is new, since that’s substack and not github or wikipedia, where one can see the history of edits.
But a new comment was posted 22 hours ago on that substack post, https://mistaketheory.substack.com/p/new-role-agi-alignment-research, perhaps there will be a response from the author (and perhaps the clarifying edit is related to this substack post becoming more known lately, via this post by Zvi or via other channels).