I share your frustration with MIRI’s communications with the alignment community.
And, the tone of this comment smells to me of danger. It looks a little too much like strawmanning, which always also implies that anyone who believes this scenario must be, at least in this context, an idiot. Since even rationalists are human, this leads to arguments instead of clarity.
I’m sure this is an accident born of frustration, and the unclarity of the MIRI argument.
I think we should prioritize not creating a polarized doomer-vs-optimist split in the safety community. It is very easy to do, and it looks to me like that’s frequently how important movements get bogged down.
Since time is of the essence, this must not happen in AI safety.
We can all express our views, we just need to play nice and extend the benefit of the doubt. MIRI actually does this quite well, although they don’t convey their risk model clearly. Let’s follow their example in the first and not the second.
I share your frustration with MIRI’s communications with the alignment community.
And, the tone of this comment smells to me of danger. It looks a little too much like strawmanning, which always also implies that anyone who believes this scenario must be, at least in this context, an idiot. Since even rationalists are human, this leads to arguments instead of clarity.
I’m sure this is an accident born of frustration, and the unclarity of the MIRI argument.
I think we should prioritize not creating a polarized doomer-vs-optimist split in the safety community. It is very easy to do, and it looks to me like that’s frequently how important movements get bogged down.
Since time is of the essence, this must not happen in AI safety.
We can all express our views, we just need to play nice and extend the benefit of the doubt. MIRI actually does this quite well, although they don’t convey their risk model clearly. Let’s follow their example in the first and not the second.
Edit: I wrote a short form post about MIRI’s communication strategy, including how I think you’re getting their risk model importantly wrong