Just to clarify: ~700 out of ~770 OpenAI employees have signed the letter (~90%)
Out of the 10 authors of the autointerpretability paper, only 5 have signed the letter. This is much lower than the average rate. One out of the 10 is no longer at OpenAI, so couldn’t have signed it, so it makes sense to count this as 5⁄9 rather than 5⁄10. Either way, it’s still well below the average rate.
Ah, nice catch, I’ll update my comment.
So it’s been falsified? Isn’t that a pretty big deal against the source, or whoever purports the letter to be 100% genuine?
I believe Nick was initially mentioned as someone who wasn’t on the letter
Apparently I read too quickly and didn’t understand the point that the parent has added explicitly.
No, the letter has not been falsified.
Just to clarify: ~700 out of ~770 OpenAI employees have signed the letter (~90%)
Out of the 10 authors of the autointerpretability paper, only 5 have signed the letter. This is much lower than the average rate. One out of the 10 is no longer at OpenAI, so couldn’t have signed it, so it makes sense to count this as 5⁄9 rather than 5⁄10. Either way, it’s still well below the average rate.