I have little idea if people have found my recent posts interesting or useful, or how they’d like them to be improved. I have a bunch of wilder speculation that piles up in unpublished drafts, and once I see an idea getting used or restated in multiple drafts, that’s what I actually post.
Fyi, I included it because it argues for a conclusion that is relevant to AI alignment. The reason I didn’t summarize it is because it seemed to say the same things as The easy goal inference problem is still hard (particularly the part about mistake models and how training for predictive accuracy gets you to human performance and no more) and the many posts on how human brains probably are not goals + optimization but are better modeled as e.g. systems of competing agents.
Thanks, this is actually really useful feedback. As the author, I “see” the differences and the ways in which I’m responding to other people, but it also makes sense to me why you’d say they’re very similar. The only time I explicitly contrast what I’m saying in that post with anything else is… contrasting with my own earlier view.
From my perspective where I already know what I’m thinking, I’m building up from the basics to frame problems in what I think is a useful way that immediately suggests some of the other things I’ve been thinking. From your perspective, if there’s something novel there, I clearly need to turn up the contrast knob.
Yay, I’m in the thing!
I have little idea if people have found my recent posts interesting or useful, or how they’d like them to be improved. I have a bunch of wilder speculation that piles up in unpublished drafts, and once I see an idea getting used or restated in multiple drafts, that’s what I actually post.
Fyi, I included it because it argues for a conclusion that is relevant to AI alignment. The reason I didn’t summarize it is because it seemed to say the same things as The easy goal inference problem is still hard (particularly the part about mistake models and how training for predictive accuracy gets you to human performance and no more) and the many posts on how human brains probably are not goals + optimization but are better modeled as e.g. systems of competing agents.
Thanks, this is actually really useful feedback. As the author, I “see” the differences and the ways in which I’m responding to other people, but it also makes sense to me why you’d say they’re very similar. The only time I explicitly contrast what I’m saying in that post with anything else is… contrasting with my own earlier view.
From my perspective where I already know what I’m thinking, I’m building up from the basics to frame problems in what I think is a useful way that immediately suggests some of the other things I’ve been thinking. From your perspective, if there’s something novel there, I clearly need to turn up the contrast knob.