Thanks for your comments.
It may be the case that the Singularity Summit is spun off at some point, but the higher priority is to spin off rationality training. Also see jimrandomh's comment. People within SI seem to generally agree that rationality training should be spun off, but we're still working out how best to do that.
Before resorting to 'large financial prizes', shouldn't level 1 include 'formalize open problems and publicise them'?
Yes. I'm working (with others, including Eliezer) on that project right now, and am quite excited about it. That project falls under strategy 1.1.
It appears that all the responses to my comment perceive me to be recommending the Summit be spun off. I am not saying anything like that. I am commenting on the document and presenting what I think is a reasonable question in the mind of a reader. So the point is not to convince me that keeping the summit is a good idea. The point is to correct the shape of the document so that this question does not arise. Explaining how the Summit fits into the re-focused mission but the rationality training does not would do the trick.
I'm particularly happy that you are working on formalizing the problems. Does this represent a change (or compromise) in E's stance on doing research in the open?
Thanks to the hard work and cooperation of Singularity Institute staff and volunteers, especially Louie Helm and Luke Muehlhauser (lukeprog), we now have a Strategic Plan, which outlines the near-term goals and vision of the Institute, and concrete actions we can take to fulfill those goals.
http://singinst.org/blog/2011/08/26/singularity-institute-strategic-plan-2011/
We welcome your feedback. You can send any comments to institute@intelligence.org.
The release of this Strategic Plan is part of an overall effort to increase transparency at Singularity Institute.