I peruse her content occasionally but I wasn't aware that she is widely recognized as the quality of her analysis/commentary varying so wildly, and often particularly lacklustre outside of her own field. Gwern mentioned that Gary Marcus has apparently said as much in the past when it comes to her coverage of AI topics. I'll refrain from citing her as a source in the future.

Replying to"AI Rapidly Gets Smarter, And Makes Some of Us Dumber," from Sabine Hossenfelder

"AI Rapidly Gets Smarter, And Makes Some of Us Dumber," from Sabine Hossenfelder

You wrote a low quality summary of a low quality secondary-source video of no particular importance by a talking head whose expertise has little to do with AI (nor is regarded as such like a Gary Marcus)

You're right that I was probably exaggerating when I said it was the best effort I could provide. It was more like what I expected would be considered a basic, accurate summary I could generate in a brief period of time.

low quality secondary-source video of no particular importance by a talking head whose expertise has little to do with AI (nor is regarded as such like a Gary Marcus)

That the source itself is not considered to... (read 563 more words →)

Replying to"AI Rapidly Gets Smarter, And Makes Some of Us Dumber," from Sabine Hossenfelder

Evan_Gaensbauer1y

"AI Rapidly Gets Smarter, And Makes Some of Us Dumber," from Sabine Hossenfelder

I appreciate that, though it seems since yesterday my post may have been downvoted even more. I wouldn't mind as much except nobody has explained why when I bothered putting in the effort. I could think maybe it's because of the clickbait-y title, or on account of the fact that it's a YouTube video meant to convey important info about AI to, like, normies in a mainstream way, and is therefore assumed to be of super low quality.

Yet that'd be in spite of facts that:
1. I clarified this is from theoretical physicist and science communicator who's trying to inform the public in an approachable way, which is something I figure others on... (read more)

Replying to"AI Rapidly Gets Smarter, And Makes Some of Us Dumber," from Sabine Hossenfelder

Evan_Gaensbauer1y

"AI Rapidly Gets Smarter, And Makes Some of Us Dumber," from Sabine Hossenfelder

I've now summarized those details as they were presented in the video. 'Staying more grounded in how bad it is' with more precision would require you or whoever learning more about these developments from the respective companies on your own, though the summaries I've now provided can hopefully serve as a starting point for doing so.

"AI Rapidly Gets Smarter, And Makes Some of Us Dumber," from Sabine Hossenfelder

Evan_Gaensbauer

Sabine Hossenfelder is a theoretical physicist and science communicator who provides analysis and commentary on a variety of science and technology topics. I mention that upfront for anyone who isn't already familiar, since I understand a link post to some video full of hot takes on AI from some random YouTuber wouldn't be appreciated.

Even more than usual, so far in 2025 there has been a rapid set of developments on the performance of AI agents and programs, compared to that of humans, so Hossenfelder in this video provides summarizes some of the most significant of recent breakthroughs and findings.

Here's a summary of the reviews of recent developments in AI covered in the... (read 416 more words →)

Replying toWhy I quit effective altruism, and why Timothy Telleen-Lawton is staying (for now)

Evan_Gaensbauer1y*

Why I quit effective altruism, and why Timothy Telleen-Lawton is staying (for now)

Comment cross-posted to the Effective Altruism Forum

Edit, 15 December 2024: I'm not sure why this comment has gotten so downvoted in only the couple hours since I posted it, though I could guess why. I wrote this comment off the cuff, so I didn't put as much effort into writing it as clearly or succinctly as I could, or maybe should, have. So, I understand how it might read is as a long, meandering nitpick, of a few statements near the beginning of the podcast episode, without me having listened to the whole episode yet. Then, I call a bunch of ex-EAs naive idiots, like Elizabeth referred to herself as at least... (read 1781 more words →)

-9

-4

•••

Human Biodiversity (Part 4: Astral Codex Ten)

Evan_Gaensbauer

This is a post written by David Thorstad, a philosophy professor who maintains a blog for criticizing various tenets of effective altruism called Reflective Altruism, as part of a series of on human biodiversity (HBD), a modern iteration of so-called race science. HBD, of course, isn't typical fare for EA, or any of its championed causes. Yet it has, to much controversy over the years, been recognized as a subject of interest among prominent thinkers associated with either the effective altruism or rationality communities, or others writers they've been affiliated with. This latest post in Thorstad's series provides a critical overview of @Scott Alexander's history of engagement with said body of ideas, both on his current blog, Astral Codex Ten (ACX), as well as before then, such as on his previous blog, Slate Star Codex (SSC).

-14

Replying toDefining alignment research

Evan_Gaensbauer1y

Defining alignment research

Do you mean Evan Hubinger, Evan R. Murphy, or a different Evan? (I would be surprised and humbled if it was me, though my priors on that are low.)

Evan_Gaensbauer1y

How do you square encouraging others to weigh in on EA fundraising, and presumably the assumption that anyone in the EA community can trust you as a collaborator of any sort, with your intentions, as you put it in July, to probably seek to shut down at some point in the future?

Catalogue of POLITICO Reports and Other Cited Articles on Effective Altruism and AI Safety Connections in Washington, DC

Evan_Gaensbauer

"Brendan Bordelon is a reporter for POLITICO on lobbying and influence in Washington, DC, by the tech industry. In late 2023, Bordelon began writing a series of articles investigating the influence of networks of non-profit/non-governmental organizations affiliated with the field of AI safety (AIS), as well as the effective altruism (EA) movement, as spearheaded by Open Philanthropy (OP), a foundation that is the primary financial backer of both causes. As of now, it’s not apparent that Bordelon or any other reporters from POLITICO have published more reports on the subject.

It’s not clear when in 2024 Bordelon’s reporting might return to a focus on influence and lobbying by the tech sector in general, beyond the auspices of just OP and EA. Additional reports from POLITICO on the subject will be added to the below list after they are published, as will be other articles or reports cited therein."

Are there high-quality surveys available detailing the rates of polyamory among Americans age 18-45 in metropolitan areas in the United States?

Evan_Gaensbauer

In recent years, there has been more public attention paid to seemingly increasing rates of less common identity characteristics or alternative lifestyle choices. This has provoked widespread media speculation that the trends in question are social contagions being spread by the communities or subcultures where such trends are most apparent. Examples of such trends include dramatically increased rates of reported self-identification with sexual or gender minority status; various kinds of neurodivergence, and polyamory/non-monogamy. Without denying the possibility that 'social contagion' may be a minor causal factor among many for increased rates of self-identification with the above characteristics, there are of course better explanations. Yet the narrative that these trends are becoming more... (read 200 more words →)

What evidence is there for (or against) theories about the extent to which effective altruist interests motivated the ouster of Sam Altman last year?

Evan_Gaensbauer

There was of course initially much speculation that effective altruism was solely responsible. That was a common accusation from some among the effective accelerationism community (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effective_accelerationism), a.k.a. "e/acc." Many of them may remain forever convinced of that, in spite of whatever accurate conclusion may eventually be substantiated.

It's nonetheless important for the EA community to try understanding how some of those among its ranks other than former OpenAI board members may have impacted the course of events leading up to and after Sam Altman was fired as CEO of OpenAI. Obviously, the ethos of EA in relation to AI safety played a role. The choices made by Helen Toner and Tasha McCauley in... (read 628 more words →)

Replying toGoogle "We Have No Moat, And Neither Does OpenAI"

Evan_Gaensbauer3y

Google "We Have No Moat, And Neither Does OpenAI"

The Substack post only mentions that a researcher leaked the document, not that any researcher authored it. The document could've been written up by one or more Google staffers who aren't directly doing the research themselves, like a project manager or a research assistant.

Nothing in the document should necessarily be taken as representative of Google, or any particular department, though the value of any insights drawn from the document could vary based on what AI research project(s)/department the authors of the document work on/in. This document is scant evidence in any direction of how representative the statements made are of Google and its leadership, or any of the teams or leaders of any particular projects or departments at Google focused on the relevant approaches to AI research.

Replying toGoogle "We Have No Moat, And Neither Does OpenAI"

Evan_Gaensbauer3y

Google "We Have No Moat, And Neither Does OpenAI"

Thanks for making this comment. I had a similar comment in mind. You're right nobody should assume any statements in this document represent the viewpoint of Google, or any of its subsidiaries, like DeepMind, or any department therein. Neither should be assumed that the researcher(s) who authored or leaked this document are department or project leads. The Substack post only mentions that a researcher leaked the document, not that any researcher authored it. The document could've been written up by one or more Google staffers who aren't directly doing the research themselves, like a project manager or a research assistant.

On the other hand, there isn't enough information to assume it was only... (read more)

Replying toChanges in Community Dynamics: A Follow-Up to 'The Berkeley Community & the Rest of Us'

Evan_Gaensbauer4y

Changes in Community Dynamics: A Follow-Up to 'The Berkeley Community & the Rest of Us'

Thank you for this detailed reply. It's valuable, so I appreciate the time and effort you've put into it.

The thoughts I've got to respond with are EA-focused concerns that would be tangential to the rationality community, so I'll draft a top-level post for the EA Forum instead of replying here on LW. I'll also read your EA Forum post and the other links you've shared to incorporate into my later response.

Please also send me a private message if you want to set up continuing the conversation over email, or over a call sometime.

Changes in Community Dynamics: A Follow-Up to 'The Berkeley Community & the Rest of Us'

Evan_Gaensbauer

I've received a few notifications in the last couple weeks that this post I wrote in 2018 about the relationship between the rationality community in Berkeley and the broader rationality community elsewhere has received some upvotes. I don't know why more people have been reading that post more recently but I've changed my mind about much of what I wrote then, so I'm writing this post as a follow-up.

What Has Changed Between 2018 and Now

The theme of how the post characterized the nature of the flow of the community members between the Berkeley rationality community and other local rationality groups is exemplified by this excerpt from another post also written in 2018... (read 1050 more words →)

Is there any way someone could post about public policy relating to abortion access (or another sensitive subject) on LessWrong without getting super downvoted?

Evan_Gaensbauer

Evan_Gaensbauer, Brendan Long

I'm aware there are some sensitive subjects that have been debated to death among rationalists, if not on LessWrong, than elsewhere online, such that it would in general be fruitless to start the conversation over instead of following what has been debated thus far. I'm curious if this is considered to apply to potentially literally any single socially, culturally or politically sensitive subject. It has been several years since I've checked but my impression from before is that the prevailing norm on LessWrong was based on a particular interpretation of "Politics is the Mind-Killer" that amounts to "politics=anti-rational=downvote on site." This seems contradicted by the original post:

I’m not saying that I think

Evan_Gaensbauer

Evan_Gaensbauer, calef

I also asked this question on the Effective Altruism Forum. One informative answer on the EA Forum from Nicole Nohemi has already summarized a range of relevant forecasts from Metaculus, as well as relevant predictions or models from Shane Legg and Demis Hassabis from leading AI research company DeepMind, and AI alignment researchers Eliezer Yudkowsky, Paul Christiano and Ajeya Cotra. This question has been cross-posted to LessWrong to broaden the conversation to the rationality community as well.

The proportion of long-termists who are expressing confident convictions that the timeline for smarter-than-human AI is much shorter than has previously been predicted has been increasing at an accelerating rate in the last year. This appears... (read more)

LESSWRONG
LW

LESSWRONG
LW

Evan_Gaensbauer

Don't Be Afraid of Asking Personally Important Questions of Less Wrong

The Berkeley Community & The Rest Of Us: A Response to Zvi & Benquo

Is Anyone Else Seeking to Help Community Members in Ukraine Who Make Refugee Claims?

Has LessWrong Ever Backfired On You?

Evan_Gaensbauer

"AI Rapidly Gets Smarter, And Makes Some of Us Dumber," from Sabine Hossenfelder

Chinese Researchers Crack ChatGPT: Replicating OpenAI’s Advanced AI Model

Human Biodiversity (Part 4: Astral Codex Ten)

Catalogue of POLITICO Reports and Other Cited Articles on Effective Altruism and AI Safety Connections in Washington, DC

Are there high-quality surveys available detailing the rates of polyamory among Americans age 18-45 in metropolitan areas in the United States?

What evidence is there for (or against) theories about the extent to which effective altruist interests motivated the ouster of Sam Altman last year?

Changes in Community Dynamics: A Follow-Up to 'The Berkeley Community & the Rest of Us'

Evan_Gaensbauer

Don't Be Afraid of Asking Personally Important Questions of Less Wrong

The Berkeley Community & The Rest Of Us: A Response to Zvi & Benquo

Is Anyone Else Seeking to Help Community Members in Ukraine Who Make Refugee Claims?

Has LessWrong Ever Backfired On You?

Evan_Gaensbauer

"AI Rapidly Gets Smarter, And Makes Some of Us Dumber," from Sabine Hossenfelder

Chinese Researchers Crack ChatGPT: Replicating OpenAI’s Advanced AI Model

Human Biodiversity (Part 4: Astral Codex Ten)

Catalogue of POLITICO Reports and Other Cited Articles on Effective Altruism and AI Safety Connections in Washington, DC

Are there high-quality surveys available detailing the rates of polyamory among Americans age 18-45 in metropolitan areas in the United States?

What evidence is there for (or against) theories about the extent to which effective altruist interests motivated the ouster of Sam Altman last year?

Changes in Community Dynamics: A Follow-Up to 'The Berkeley Community & the Rest of Us'

What Has Changed Between 2018 and Now