Switch out ‘harmful’ for ‘aiming at the wrong goals’, since that’s the possibility cipher raised and Eliezer didn’t. (Those goals might make MIRI useless; harmful isn’t the only possibility.)
I’d guess that Eliezer’s rephrasing reflects (1) his vagueness about the means by which CFAR would act as game-changer, and (2) his being much more worried that MIRI lacks the ingenuity and intellectual firepower to achieve its goals than worried that MIRI’s deepest values and concerns are misplaced. CFAR might also help in some low-probability scenarios, but it’s the likelier scenarios that make Eliezer a CFAR supporter.
Do you choose that rephrasing because you don’t see how MIRI’s work could be harmful or because there is nothing CFAR can do in that case?
Switch out ‘harmful’ for ‘aiming at the wrong goals’, since that’s the possibility cipher raised and Eliezer didn’t. (Those goals might make MIRI useless; harmful isn’t the only possibility.)
I’d guess that Eliezer’s rephrasing reflects (1) his vagueness about the means by which CFAR would act as game-changer, and (2) his being much more worried that MIRI lacks the ingenuity and intellectual firepower to achieve its goals than worried that MIRI’s deepest values and concerns are misplaced. CFAR might also help in some low-probability scenarios, but it’s the likelier scenarios that make Eliezer a CFAR supporter.