= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
asr comments on Proposal for "Open Problems in Friendly AI" - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (14)
Interesting direction.
Couple small questions:
Who is the intended audience for this document? Would you be able to name specific researchers who you are hoping to influence?
As an alternative formulation, what's the community in which you hope to publish this?
Why is Eliezer-time measured in months, and Luke-time in hours?
Do you expect to involve folks who haven't previously been involved with SIAI? If so, when?
How large a research team / author list would you expect the final version to have? Is fairly large "5" or "15"?
That's a good question, especially considering that 250 hours is on the order of months (6 weeks at 40 hours/week, or 4 weeks at 60 hours/week).
EDIT: Units confusion
Oops, I meant 150 hours for me.
Eliezer's time is measured in months because he tracks his time in days not hours, so I have an easier time predicting how many days (which I can convert to months) something will take Eliezer to complete, rather than how many hours it will take him to complete.
I get 6 weeks at 40 hours/week.
Yep, thanks for that.
Every smart person who is fairly persuaded to care about AI risk and then asks us, "Okay, so what's the technical research agenda?" This is a lot of people.
It doesn't matter much. It's something we would email to particular humans who are already interested.
See here.
Possibly, e.g. domain experts in micro-econ. When we need them.
My guess is 10-ish.