“Why didn’t you challenge anybody else to write up a list like that, if you wanted to make a point of nobody else being able to write it?” I was asked.
Because I don’t actually think it does any good, or persuades anyone of anything, people don’t like tests like that, and I don’t really believe in them myself either. I couldn’t pass a test somebody else invented around something they found easy to do, for many such possible tests.
But you do think that it is important evidence about the world that no one else had written that list before you?
It seems like there’s a disconnect between these perspectives. On the one hand, tests like this are very idiosyncratic to the test-asker, and (by implication) don’t have very much bearing on other things we care about. On the other hand, it’s very damning that the alignment community didn’t produce a list comparable to the list of lethalities?
But you do think that it is important evidence about the world that no one else had written that list before you?
It seems like there’s a disconnect between these perspectives. On the one hand, tests like this are very idiosyncratic to the test-asker, and (by implication) don’t have very much bearing on other things we care about. On the other hand, it’s very damning that the alignment community didn’t produce a list comparable to the list of lethalities?