I think humanity’s defense against extinction (slash eternal dictatorship) from AGI is an odd combination of occasionally some very competent people, occasionally some very rich people, and one or two teams, but mostly a lot of ragtag nerds in their off-hours, scrambling to get something together. I think it is not the case that you should assume the obvious and basic things to your eyes will be covered, and there are many dropped balls, even though sometimes some very smart and competent people have attempted to do something very well.
To answer the question you asked, I think that actually there have been some related lists before, but I think they’ve been about fields relevant for AI alignment research or AI policy and government analysis, whereas this list is more relevant for controlling AI systems in worlds where there are many unaligned AI systems operating alongside humans for multiple years.
Thanks, this is helpful! I also think this helps me understand a lot better what is intended to be different about @Buck ’s research agenda from others, that I didn’t understand previously.
I think humanity’s defense against extinction (slash eternal dictatorship) from AGI is an odd combination of occasionally some very competent people, occasionally some very rich people, and one or two teams, but mostly a lot of ragtag nerds in their off-hours, scrambling to get something together. I think it is not the case that you should assume the obvious and basic things to your eyes will be covered, and there are many dropped balls, even though sometimes some very smart and competent people have attempted to do something very well.
To answer the question you asked, I think that actually there have been some related lists before, but I think they’ve been about fields relevant for AI alignment research or AI policy and government analysis, whereas this list is more relevant for controlling AI systems in worlds where there are many unaligned AI systems operating alongside humans for multiple years.
Thanks, this is helpful! I also think this helps me understand a lot better what is intended to be different about @Buck ’s research agenda from others, that I didn’t understand previously.