Both. Not sure, its something like lesswrong/EA speak mixed with the VC speak.
Kabir Kumar
Karma: 94
What I liked about applying for VC funding was the specific questions.
“How is this going to make money?”
“What proof do you have this is going to make money”
and it being clear the bullshit that they wanted was numbers, testimonials from paying customers, unambiguous ways the product was actually better, etc. And then standard bs about progress, security, avoiding weird wibbly wobbly talk, ‘woke’, ‘safety’, etc.
With Alignment funders, they really obviously have language they’re looking for as well, or language that makes them more and less willing to put more effort into understanding the proposal. Actually, they have it more than the VCs. But they act as if they don’t.
it’s so unnecessarily hard to get funding in alignment.
they say ‘Don’t Bullshit’ but what that actually means is ‘Only do our specific kind of bullshit’.
and they don’t specify because they want to pretend that they don’t have their own bullshit
I would not call this a “Guide”.
It’s more a list of recommendations and some thoughts on them.
What observations would change your mind?
You can split your brain and treat LLMs differently, in a different language. Rather, I can and I think most people could as well
Ok, I want to make that at scale. If multiple people have done it and there’s value in it, then there is a formula of some kind.
We can write it down, make it much easier to understand unambiguously (read: less unhelpful confusion about what to do or what the writer meant and less time wasted figuring that out) than any of the current agent foundations type stuff.
I’m extremely skeptical that needing to hear a dozen stories dancing around some vague ideas of a point and then 10 analogies (exagerrating to get emotions across) is the best we can do.
regardless of if it works, I think it’s disrespectful for being manipulative at worst and wasting the persons time at best.
You can just say the actual criticism in a constructive way. Or if you don’t know how to, just ask—“hey I have some feedback to give that I think would help, but I don’t know how to say it without it potentially sounding bad—can I tell you and you know I don’t dislike you and I don’t mean to be disrespectful?” and respect it if they say no, they’re not interested.
yup.
Multiple talented researchers I know got into alignment because of PauseAI.
You can also give them the clipboard and pen, works well
in general, when it comes to things which are the ‘hard part of alignment’, is the crux
```
a flawless method of ensuring the AI system is pointed at and will always continue to be pointed at good things
```
?
the key part being flawless—and that seeming to need a mathematical proof?
Trying to put together a better explainer for the hard part of alignment, while not having a good math background https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ePSNT1XR2qOpq8POSADKXtqxguK9hSx_uACR8l0tDGE/edit?usp=sharing
Please give feedback!
Make the (!aligned!) AGI solve a list of problems, then end all other AIs, convince (!harmlessly!) all humans to never make another AI, in a way that they will pass down to future humans, then end itself.
Thank you for sharing negative results!!
Sure? I agree this is less bad than ‘literally everyone dying and that’s it’, assuming there’s humans around, living, still empowered, etc in the background.
I was saying overall, as a story, I find it horrifying, especially contrasting with how some seem to see it utopic.
Sure, but it seems like everyone died at some point anyway, and some collective copies of them went on?
I don’t think so. I think they seem to be extremely lonely and sad and the AIs are the only way for them to get any form of empowerment. And each time they try to inch further with empowering themselves with the AIs, it leads to the AI actually getting more powerful and themselves only getting a brief moment of more power, but ultimately degrading in mental capacity. And needing to empower the AI more and more, like an addict needing an ever greater high. Until there is nothing left for them to do, but Die and let the AI become the ultimate power.
I don’t particularly care if some non human semisentients manage to be kind of moral/good at coordinating, if it came at what seems to be the cost of all human life.
Even if offscreen all of humanity didn’t die, these people dying, killing themselves and never realizing what’s actually happening is still insanely horrific and tragic.
How is this optimistic.
Helps me decide which research to focus on