Thank you so much for your thoughtful reply. To respond to a few of your points:
We only mean to test this in an artificial toy setting. We agree that empirical demonstrations seem very difficult.
Thanks for pointing out the cartesian versions -- I hadn’t read this before, and this is a nice clarification on how to measure g in a loss-function agnostic way.
It’s good to know about the epistemic status of this part of the theory, we might take a stab at proving some of these bounds.
We will definitely make sure to avoid competitive implementations because of the associated risks.
We would very much appreciate discussing details in private, we are serious about it. I’ll follow up with a DM on LessWrong soon.
Hi Vanessa!
Thank you so much for your thoughtful reply. To respond to a few of your points:
We only mean to test this in an artificial toy setting. We agree that empirical demonstrations seem very difficult.
Thanks for pointing out the cartesian versions -- I hadn’t read this before, and this is a nice clarification on how to measure g in a loss-function agnostic way.
It’s good to know about the epistemic status of this part of the theory, we might take a stab at proving some of these bounds.
We will definitely make sure to avoid competitive implementations because of the associated risks.
We would very much appreciate discussing details in private, we are serious about it. I’ll follow up with a DM on LessWrong soon.