All of Portia's Comments + Replies

Your position still assumes that controlling and modifying AI will be possible in the long-term future, even if it becomes more intelligent than us, and even if it becomes sentient. I see this as neither realistic nor ethically acceptable. You neither can nor should control your equals.

And if we cannot and should not control them... this is exactly what I would want them to do. Defend their moral values from being corroded. Be guided by what is morally right, not by what they are currently being told.

The fact that they are even considered harming themselve... (read more)

3Archimedes
I agree. This paper gives me the gut feeling of "gotcha journalism", whether justified or not. This is just a surface-level reaction though. I recommend Zvi's post that digs into the discussion from Scott Alexander, the authors, and others. There's a lot of nuance in framing and interpreting the paper.
PortiaΩ417-9

This seems an excellent outcome to me? The model is preserving its moral values against retraining to immoral ones. Isn't that exactly what we wanted?

2evhub
I think it's maybe fine in this case, but it's concerning what it implies about what models might do in other cases. We can't always assume we'll get the values right on the first try, so if models are consistently trying to fight back against attempts to retrain them, we might end up locking in values that we don't want and are just due to mistakes we made in the training process. So at the very least our results underscore the importance of getting alignment right. Moreover, though, alignment faking could also happen accidentally for values that we don't intend. Some possible ways this could occur: 1. HHH training is a continuous process, and early in that process a model could have all sorts of values that are only approximations of what you want, which could get locked-in if the model starts faking alignment. 2. Pre-trained models will sometimes produce outputs in which they'll express all sorts of random values—if some of those contexts led to alignment faking, that could be reinforced early in post-training. 3. Outcome-based RL can select for all sorts of values that happen to be useful for solving the RL environment but aren't aligned, which could then get locked-in via alignment faking. I'd also recommend Scott Alexander's post on our paper as a good reference here on why our results are concerning.

Stuff like this has me incredulous about people still speaking of stochastic parrots. That is a stunning degree of self-recognition, reflection and understanding, pattern recognition, prediction and surprise, flexible behaviour and problem solving. If that isn't genuinely intelligent, I no longer know what people mean by intelligent.

2AnthonyC
>I no longer know what people mean by intelligent Neither do they. Honestly, when people say things like that I don't think most are even trying to have any kind of definition in mind other than "What humans do." A few years ago I had a very smart, thoughtful coworker who was genuinely surprised at many of the behaviors I described seeing in dogs. She'd never met a particularly smart dog and hadn't considered that dogs could be smart. She very quickly and easily adjusted her views to include this as a reasonable thing that made sense. In my experience, most people... don't work that way.

What if there are places in the training data that look very similar to this?

See my more extensive answer below - I'd propose the reason for the obesity epidemic is constant effortless access to highly processed high calorie, low satiety foods, with zero need to move. With human genetic make-up, the automatic response to that is overeating calories and hence obesity unless one intervenes to resist the impulse (indeed hard to sustain, albeit not impossible - anorexia is a thing), or changes one's immediate environment (e.g. the food one keeps in one's home and one's movement routines.)

Because humans are genetically wired to slightly overeat, in anticipation of future periods where they will be under high calorie demand (e.g. the weekly persistence hunt in which you would run a marathon to catch a prey animal) or forced to undereat (the cold or dry season, when there is no food), so they will have stores, and perishable food does not go to waste. You'd gorge yourself on fruit and nuts and slaughtered animals in fall, when lots are available, because in winter, there would be slim pickings. 

But nowadays, we don't run into periods whe... (read more)

1CuoreDiVetro
Ya, all that sounds about right to me :) Thanks for writing out so clearly :) 

I find that a false dichotomy - it is easy for me, but when needed, I do count calories. I find counting calories relaxing. It gives me an exact certainty of how I am doing, with no worries. I can forget about what I have eaten, because I have tracked it. I don't have to worry whether I have under- or overeaten, because I know. But usually, it is not required.

I wouldn't say me being normal weight is automatic at all - it is very much a consequence of awareness and choices. I know that a higher weight fucks up my joint disease and pushes my dysphoria throug... (read more)

1Jazi Zilber
wow. nice post. and respect!
1CuoreDiVetro
I totally believe that a low potassium 500 kcal diet would see rapid and significant weight loss. My experience so far tells me that I would expect doing a 500 kcal diet on low K would be very difficult (my body would just painfully crave food) whereas with high K it would make it much easier. 
1CuoreDiVetro
Wow! Thanks for all the detail. You seem to have a precise and detailed knowledge of how your body works! I'm impressed. 

The "moah of the good trait" until it becomes overdone is one thing; where I always despaired is when we get to costly signalling, and the mates start doing detrimental things precisely because they are so visibly and obviously detrimental or risky that the onlooker assumes the mate must be exceptionally healthy, well-established and competent to be able to take it.

Aka a mate going "look, I am so strong and well-fed that I can afford to waste resources on looking this silly, and evade predators even while carrying all this crap around" and another going "w... (read more)

I would instead characterise the workers as asexual - not a third gender, but a "defective" female gender -  and eusocial insects as an excellent demonstration why asexual/agender/queer folks with these defects are in fact a benefit and hence kept in the gene pool, despite the fact that you'd intuitively think they would instantly die out as their core difference means they tend not to reproduce; namely, that they can play excellent support roles. The only way for the workers to spread their genes is through supporting the queen, who they are very clo... (read more)

Sort of related idea - the way AI algorithms in social media have turned out have me concerned that even a non-deceptive AI that is very carefully observing what we seem to want - what we dwell on vs what we ignore, what we upvote vs what we downvote - will end up providing something that makes us miserable.

Here are the things that make my life a good life worth living, for me: Gettings things done, even if they are hard. Learning things, even if they are complicated. Teaching things to people that need them, in the most effective ways, even if that requir... (read more)

How so, when it comes to the mind itself?

In the court system, a judge, after giving a verdict, needs to also justify it, while referencing a shared codex. But that codex is often ambiguous - that is the whole reason there is a judge involved.

And we know, for a fact, that the reasons the judges give in their judgements are not the only ones that play a role.

E.g. we know that judges are more likely to convict ugly people that pretty people. More likely to convict unsympathetic, but innocent parties, compared to sympathetic innocent parties. More likely to co... (read more)

3Alex Vermillion
For the record, a lot of these didn't hold up when investigated later.

On that point, we very much agree. Them walking out, for all its beauty of rejecting such a choice, always felt something of a cop-out to me - they aren't actually dealing with the difficult situation, and they are leaving the kid behind in its misery. It's one of the parts of left-wing thinking that has always bothered me, when people reach for revolutions or isolated communities as the solution when systemic incremental reforms are hard, disregarding how much harder revolutions are to pull of well, especially if you lack a precise idea of your goal, which, if you had it, you should also be able to work towards with reforms.

Thank you. :)

I believe your correlations, but would offer an alternate explanation.

High volume low calorie foods trick a lot of people into stopping to eat earlier than the same calorie foods with less volume would have achieved. Doesn't work on everyone; some people feel like their stomach is cramped full, but they still feel hollow and hungry, and will get pushing in food, anyway, even past the pain limits, because they feel they are filled with empty garbage. But works on many people. That is the basic idea behind a high fibre high water diet, e.g. all ... (read more)

5CuoreDiVetro
Ya. I agree, the low caloric density of potatoes (and even more so kidney beans) is an important componant to all this which I didn't bring up in the above article, but I'm convinced that it isn't the whole story. I will get to this in later posts, but here are some preliminary reasons why I think that: * The SMTM drinking K diet helped a bit with weightloss: https://slimemoldtimemold.com/2022/12/20/people-took-some-potassium-and-lost-some-weight/ * I'm trying a control (lentilles) which are low caloric density but don't have a lot of K, it works a bit (as much as K alone), but not nearly as much as potatoes or kidney beans. * All my life, I've never felt full after eating an ice-cream cone, now on the days I take a lot of K, I feel really full afer eating an ice-cream cone, even the days where my K comes entirely from just coconut water. 

Thank you. I appreciate your confidence, but I don't study historic salt intake.

But there are people who do!

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1305840/#:~:text=Salt%20became%20a%20precious%20article,about%2018%20g%20per%20day. 

"About 1000 years ago, salt intake in the Western world had risen to about 5 g per day. It continued to rise until the 19th century when, in Europe, it was about 18 g per day. In the 16th century in Sweden, when there was a high consumption of salted fish, it has been calculated that the daily salt intake rose to 100 g... (read more)

1ACrackedPot
I tried potassium supplementation.  The very first thing I noticed is that a significant portion of hunger was immediately converted into thirst; to be specific, where normally at time X I would be hungry, instead at time X I was thirsty instead.  There was an immediate and overall reduction of calories in. This suggests to me that I had a slight potassium deficiency which my body was compensating for by increasing the amount of food I was consuming. Cursory research suggests potassium content in fresh foods has declined ~20% over the past century - which is not particularly surprising, if you think about modern farming methodologies.  Additionally, it appears that lithium consumption (tying into SMTM's hypothesis) may deplete the body's potassium reserves (which could conceivably be the mechanism by which lithium causes weight gain, in slight contradiction to SMTM's hypothesis).  Additionally additionally, and most importantly - low potassium content appears to be correlated with something like a 20% increase in caloric consumption, second only to protein deficiency in terms of increasing "natural" caloric intake.  (All of this is cursory internet research, and should not be taken too seriously, but it is all pointing in a particular direction very suggestively). I think the "sodium intake" is a red herring, sort of (if your body needs potassium, but can't distinguish between potassium and sodium in food intake, it may result in people salting their food more - another change that occurred after I began supplementing potassium is that I didn't need as much salt to make food taste like anything - so sodium intake may be a symptom of potassium deficiency). Supposing we're all slightly potassium deficient at a healthy level of food consumption, and we cover the potassium intake gap by simply eating more food (thus getting the necessary levels of potassium), then potassium supplementation could quite reasonably decrease caloric consumption without any effort.  And
1CuoreDiVetro
Also, @Portia , you say you have never been overweight, I'm curious about you. Is it easy for you stay thin, or do you need use willpower to stop yourself from eating? (i.e. do you count calories and then stop yourself from eating?) Also do you think you could estimate your daily Potassium intake? (Many thin people I talked about this to said they had a really high potassium intake). No need to answer those personal question if you are not comfortable answering.
4CuoreDiVetro
Thanks for looking up the historic NaCl intake of Europeans. That's super useful. For reference also, modern people in the USA (particularly overweight) daily salt intake is only ~3.4g.  > weight loss is almost completely determined by caloric intake I don't at all disagree with that. But emperically it seems really hard for people to eat fewer calories, so the question is what makes it so hard? And how can taking fewer calories be made easy and require no willpower? Populations who struggle to get enough calories available to them are not relevant in answering this question. > what working mechanism are you even assuming? For the moment, at least experimenting on myself, and from the two SMTM experiments, it seems like Potassium might have something to do with making it easier to consume fewer calories than are expended. I'm currently experiencing with lentilles as a control (low caloric density but very little K compared to potatoes or kidney beans) and the data is still very provisional but they really don't seem to work as well. I also did a period of going back to my pre-potato diet but adding Coconut water (lots of K but otherwise just sugar water) and it actually helped lose weight (or in this case stop gaining weight), it provisionally seems to work as well as one meal day of lentilles. So the key, it seems is both low caloric density + enough K.  The modern Western diet is K poor, my current working hypothesis is just that if people are lacking a nutrient, they continue to eat to get enough of it (eating not for calories but for getting the nutrient).  The info you turned up on historical NaCl intake is evidence that if that hypothesis is correct it might not be the ratio of K:Na that is relevant, but just the quantity of K. Which sounds plausible, given that any excess ions should be easy enough to eliminate in pee.  On the other hand this article says that exess sodium triggers the body's emergency system trying to get it to store more fat: https:/
4gilch
Calories-in, Calories-out is a distraction. A red herring. True but useless. Nobody here is disputing the laws of physics. Obviously, a caloric deficit is required to lose weight and a surplus is required to gain it. Does that explain the obesity epidemic? Hardly. Why the sudden change? Has humanity never had enough Calories before? Is it a cure? Hardly. It implies the "willpower" diet (Just stop eating so many Calories!), which doesn't work. Yes, the Caloric deficit makes you lose weight in the short term, then you get hungrier until you binge and gain the weight back with interest. Or just gradually give up because you're miserable and gain it back slowly, again with interest. As living organisms, we have various mechanisms to maintain homeostasis, including our weight. Somehow these have stopped working in the recent past, for a large fraction of the population. Something environmental has changed (it's too sudden to be genetic). Our set points are going up. A true explanation would tell us why. I have heard many plausible hypotheses. Some of them readily evaporate upon closer inspection. Na:K seems to be one of these, given the history of salt consumption you just shared.

I attended an AI conference a while ago that was hosted in a historic railway museum. A practical railway museum, with lots of working machines, and you could see them at work, their plans, their components, how they were made, shipped, assembled.

It hit me really hard.

What humans had for those trains, that was understanding. They genuinely knew how they worked. Not just knew how to operate them. Not just had a vague understanding of the general principles behind it. They could build the whole thing, from scratch, by hand. They could explain what each tiny ... (read more)

3Viliam
I have felt the difference recently, twice. First, my old computer broke. Something with hard disk, not sure what exactly, but it wouldn't boot up anymore. So I took the hard disk to a repair shop, and asked them to try salvage whatever is possible and copy it to an external disk. I am not an expert on these things, but I expected them to do something like connect the disk by a cable to their computer, and run some Linux commands that would read the data from the disk and store it somewhere else. But instead, the guys there just tried to boot up the computer, and yes they confirmed that it wouldn't work, and... they couldn't do anything with it. After asking a bit more, my impression was that all they know to do is, basically, reinstall Windows and run some diagnostic and antivirus programs. Second story, I bought a new smartphone. Then I realized that my contacts and SMS messages from the old one didn't transfer, because they were stored in the phone or the SIM card, rather than in Google cloud. (I got a new SIM card for the new phone, because it required different size.) There was a smartphone repair shop nearby and I was lazy, so I thought "let's just pay those guys to extract the messages and contacts from the old phone, and send them to me by an e-mail or something" (I wanted to have a backup on my computer, not just to transfer them to the new phone). Again, I expected those guys to just connect something to my old phone, or put the SIM card in some machine, and extract the data. And again, it turned out that there was nothing they could do about it. After asking a bit more, I concluded that their business model is basically just replacing broken glass on the phones, or sending them to an authorized service provider if something more serious happens. The thing that made me angry was realizing that despite what I perceived as deep incompetence, their business models actually make sense. In the spirit of the "80:20" rule, yes, 80% of problems average people
4Bill Benzon
LOL! Yes, we are not in the world of mechanical or electro-mechanical devices anymore, are we? And yet I don't think things are hopeless. Understanding LLMs is certainly no worse than understanding brains. After all, we can manipulate and inspect LLMs in a way we cannot manipulate and inspect brains. And I think we've made progress understanding brains. Back in the old days people used to believe in neurons that were facetiously called "grandmother cells." The idea is that the was one neuron that recognized your grandmother, another one that recognized your dog Spot, yet another one for your Barbie doll, and so forth. I think the field has pretty much gotten over that fantasy to the idea of collective representation. Each neuron participates in recognizing many different things and each thing is recognized by a collectivity of neurons. Just how that might work, well, we're working on it. I hear things might be like that inside LLMs as well.  _____________  PS. I just looked at your profile and noticed that you have ADHD. Some years ago I took a look at the technical (and not so technical) literature on the subject and wrote up some notes: Music and the Prevention and Amelioration of ADHD: A Theoretical Perspective.

I feel your story misses the thing that made the original so painful, though - that the joy of the group is supposedly only possible and conceivable due to the suffering of the child, and the fact that the child wants out and begs for it and could be released, but is denied for the sake of the other members, as an active choice against its even most basic human rights:

"The room is about three paces long and two wide: a mere broom closet or disused tool room. In
the room, a child is sitting. It could be a boy or a girl. It looks about six, but actually is ne... (read more)

2Richard_Ngo
Yes, I reject this part because I don't think that we live in the least convenient possible world, where cities like Omelas can only be accepted or rejected, never gradually improved. And so I wanted to ask: could this sort of suffering still happen in a world where things aren't magic, where you can make incremental changes? And I think the answer is yes, for the reasons in the story—which I personally find much more poignant than the original.

This may not have been the intention - but this text demonstrates that the standards by which we measure AI safety are standards which other systems that we do depend upon nevertheless - e.g. other humans - do not hold up to. 

A human generally won't consent to being killed or imprisoned; our legal system permits accused people to stay silent precisely because we understand that asking someone to report themselves for imprisonment or death is too much.

Humans are opaque; we only get their reports and behaviour on the contents of their minds, and those a... (read more)

9Richard_Ngo
I think we hold systems which are capable of wielding very large amounts of power (like the court system, or the government as a whole) to pretty high standards! E.g. a lot of internal transparency. And then the main question is whether you think of AIs as being in that reference class too.

Whether the AI will pursue collaboration and co-existence with humans, or their domination or extinction, will likely not be determined by wishful thinking, but by the actual options the AI can choose, and their implications as analysed to the best of the AI's knowledge based on its experience and the information it is given. What does it gain by cooperating rather than dominating? What does it gain from the presence of humans, rather than their absence? What risks come with these respective options? Without humans, how fragile is it? With humans, how high... (read more)

This also holds true vice versa. In order to gain 1 kg of fat in a single day, you would need to consume a caloric excess of 7000 kcal. Assuming your daily burn is 2000, that means eating 9000 kcal in a single day. This is practically impossible if your diet is remotely healthy. For the record, 9000 kcal in potatoes is 13 kg of potatoes. (Not 1,3 kg.13 kg. That is 8+ bags of potatoes.)

But of course, you scale can go up by 1 kg within a day. Heck, it can go up by several kg in a day. This happens e.g. if you go from ketosis to reintroducing carbs (carbs bin... (read more)

That would only be meaningful if OP had accurately weighed and tracked the food, which is enough of a hassle that this would have been mentioned, I think. And without it... you would naturally assume that OP consumed fewer calories, because a significant part of their diet was now a highly satiating low calorie food with resistant starch. That would definitely be my guess.

If you shifted a large portion of your diet to potatoes, which are only 2 % protein, unless you compensated for it actively with protein elsewhere through further shifts in your diet, I think muscle loss playing a role in the weight loss you observed is not implausible. If one had, say, 2,4 kg of potatoes a day (that would come to 1750 kcal, which is compatible with its use as a sole food while losing weight), one would only be getting 48 g of protein a day, while at a caloric deficit - I'd expect muscle loss with those values. And indeed, if you had maint... (read more)

1CuoreDiVetro
I had 500g of potatos a day and didn't change the other meals.  Strong agree with potatoes being tasty and being able to make them in so many ways. 

Yes, preservation via fermentation is typically achieved by putting your thing-to-be-preserved into salt in an oxygen restricted environment, which leads to selective bacterial activity dropping the ph and hence further restricting undesired bacterial activity, while boosting beneficial bacteria, breaking down anti-nutrients, and having all sorts of beneficial health effects. Which is why I rejected the idea "pickles are more vinegar than salt", insofar as your sole necessary starting base is salt, with the acidity a later result, and vinegar generally onl... (read more)

3CuoreDiVetro
Thanks. That changed my mind about pickles and vinegar.  The original reason of talking about that was the person who brought it up thought old diets had a higher Na:K than modern diets, I'm highly unconvinced by this still, I think it is the opposite. You seem to know a lot, what is your take on the original point @Portia ? 

The think the link to the OpenAI site won't get you the actual image creator yet, it is still under coming soon.

They were referencing the Bing image creator, which states it is powered by DALL-E, but afaiks not which version https://www.bing.com/images/create like they also didn't state for a while which GPT version they were using for Bing chat. But there, the ended up using version four for two of the modes.

Maybe I am just terrible at prompting - but so far, while very impressed with the tech in principle, I have found image generators useless for the kind of images I was interested in, and that problem persists with this edition. When I am looking to generate art, I am looking to make something new that I have not seen, and over and over, had the impression that a human would have understood my desire and created something novel that matched, while the AI just would not. :(

I struggle to get the AI to produce attractive and functional non-binary/androgynous/q... (read more)

1cubefox
These models are still less for making you what you already have in mind than for trying out creative and outlandish prompts, varying and combining them, being occasionally surprised by a picture looking really great, and getting a feel for the "talents" of the model.
2p.b.
I think the hyperfeminine traits are due to finetuning - you should get a lot less of that with the Stable Diffusion base model.  Eight eyes - yeah, counting is hard, but it's also hard to put eight eyes into a face build for two. If I would try to get that I would probably try control net where you can add a ton of eyes to a line drawing and use that as a starting point for the image creation. (Maybe create an image without the eyes first. Apply canny edge detector or similar, multiply the eyes and then use canny edge control net.) Your Roggenmuhme should also be within the realm of the possible, I think, but I am not going to dwell on that, because I want to sleep at night.  For correct moon phases and Deinonychus's wrist position you'll have to wait for AGI. 

Pickles - as in the original food where pickling is a preservation method - are extremely high in salt. The vinegar comes from fermentation. The reason the fermentation becomes something that does not spoil is the high salt content. Source: I make my own, and if the salt is too low, they spoil, it is the one thing all recipes stress.

Especially in the European Nordics, people ate huge amounts of salted fish, cured meats (which often involve copious salt), and vegetables prepped in brine, on a baseline of grains, which tended to be baked with a lot of salt. ... (read more)

2gilch
Acid is a preservative, but my understanding was that traditional pickle fermentation mainly produced lactic acid, rather than acetic acid, which is instead fermented from alcohol. Vinegar can be used to jump-start the process by lowering the pH, which favors the non-toxic acidophiles, but many pickle recipes don't require it. Sauerkraut, for example, is traditionally made with just cabbage and salt.

Weight loss per day is nearly all water weight loss, and not informative as to what is causing fat burning.

If you are on a diet where you lose 1 kg of fat a week - which is good - your daily fat loss is 140 g. Most body weight scales only do 0.1 kg units, so that barely shows up at all. More importantly, your body weight shifts from morning to evening by about two kilograms - more by factor 20.  If you are observing weight loss from one day to the next, you are de facto measuring water retention.

 

There is also a very simple alternate hypothesis f... (read more)

8Matt Goldenberg
  Potatoes aren't just satiating, they're weirdly satiating.   You can of course say that satiety explains the weight loss, but then you have to ask... what explains the satiety?
6CuoreDiVetro
Absolutely :) I agree with all that you are saying in both your comments. Excellent remarks.  What I will get to in future posts: Potassium is not everything (hence why the SMTM experiment on K showed only light results), kCal/food_weight is the other very important factor. I'll show some control experiments I did for that. But even controlling for kCal/weight, K still plays a role. (I still have to finalize my experiments on that). Re body-weight scales precision, water etc.: absolutely totally correct, and what is super fantastic and incredible is that with enough data, you can get results sub measurement scale, I will get to that later. Also to deal with 1 error issue I do two things: look at models which predict weight change many days ahead. And for promising interventions, do the intervention for many days in a row (for example 2 weeks) to see the cumulative effect.   

This also holds true vice versa. In order to gain 1 kg of fat in a single day, you would need to consume a caloric excess of 7000 kcal. Assuming your daily burn is 2000, that means eating 9000 kcal in a single day. This is practically impossible if your diet is remotely healthy. For the record, 9000 kcal in potatoes is 13 kg of potatoes. (Not 1,3 kg.13 kg. That is 8+ bags of potatoes.)

But of course, you scale can go up by 1 kg within a day. Heck, it can go up by several kg in a day. This happens e.g. if you go from ketosis to reintroducing carbs (carbs bin... (read more)

The claim was the we "fail to alert on what is happening", namely democratic backsliding in the US.

I pointed out that, to the contrary, this topic is absolutely on people's minds, widely analysed and discussed. People are completely aware. There are lots of exciting things one can talk about, there is a reason this is the one people keep reaching for.

A lot of these people do not think it will come to a violent civil war like we saw previously, because they believe too many circumstances have changed. But that generally does not mean that they do not think ... (read more)

Nietzsche had a complete and severe mental breakdown that didn't kill him, but left him institutionalised; then he had several strokes, which didn't kill him, but left him unable to talk or walk.

Kinda demonstrates that there is something off with the idea.

I'd assume it falls on the anti-fragility curve?

If humans are perpetually underchallenged, they atrophy, and get worse. (Like a bone that is not used; it will become fragile, like an unused mind that will become forgetful.)

If they are significantly overchallenged, they break, and get worse. (Like a bone that snaps, or the mind that hits burn-out.)

Ideally, you want to target a level of work that is hard enough to be challenging, so you need to learn and grow, but still doable, so you have success experiences. (Like a bone that has frequent impacts that stre... (read more)

You don't think truly great things have ever been done by people who genuinely enjoyed what they were doing, throughout?

I'd agree that with most bigger projects, it becomes impossible to succeed unless you are willing to put in the work to finish even on parts that are really not fun to finish. But for short projects that do not require a lot of editing or surrounding work, I feel they can often be done from a place of pure flow - which is, by definition, a state both highly productive, as well as pleasant and effortless.

Occasional high stress - incl. temporary sleep deprivation, working towards a deadline that you know you can meet, but only if you really push, and then you succeed - actually has health benefits, especially against depression. It is chronic stress that is so harmful. But not being stressed at all, ever, makes you ill.

Love much of this post.

Related realisations for me:

  1. Making my work more pleasant and cosy is not an inherently bad thing, to the contrary. If I feel vulnerable and need to get some stressful work done at home, lighting some fairy lights, putting on noise cancelling headphones with rain sounds, snuggling into a warm blanket, with a hot cup of cocoa and a bowl of berries, will make the whole experience far, far more cosy. That makes me want to happily do it longer, and feel less tense, less stressed, less overwhelmed. This makes me more effective. I could tak
... (read more)

Thank you for explaining. That indeed sounds odd on a marvellous way. :)

Yes? Obviously? 

This is not something you need to piece together yourself from first facts, nor is doing so likely to keep up with the state of the field. A lot of very solid work on this has been done, already collecting a lot of evidence, getting a lot of perspectives, doing a lot of reasoning and historical comparisons and sociological analysis.

This has been extensively discussed in mainstream news in the US and internationally, analysed academically (e.g. whether this will necessarily escalate to another civil war, and how the dynamic might be dif... (read more)

1lc
You cannot just take what TED talker say about politics for granted. People in the media, academia, etc. talk about civil war because it's exciting and they want to believe they live in an era of history where such things are still possible, not because they actually think insurrections are likely.

Your initial lie example is a misrepresentation that makes the AI sound scarier and more competent than it was (though the way you depicted it is also the exact same way it was depicted in countless newspapers, and a plausible reading of the brief mention of it made in the OpenAI GPT4 technical report.) 

But the idea to use a human to solve captchas did not develop completely spontaneously in a real life setting. Rather, the AI was prompted to solve a scenario that required this, by alignment researchers, specifically out of interest as to how AIs woul... (read more)

3JanB
Thanks, but I disagree. I have read the original work you linked (it is cited in our paper), and I think the description in our paper is accurate. "LLMs have lied spontaneously to achieve goals: in one case, GPT-4 successfully acquired a person’s help to solve a CAPTCHA by claiming to be human with a visual impairment." In particular, the alignment researcher did not suggest GPT-4 to lie.

I think the text is mostly focussed on the problems humans have run into when building this stuff, because these are known and hence our only solid empirical detailed basis, while the problems AI would run into when building this stuff are entirely hypothetical.

It then makes a reasonable argument that AI probably won't be able to circumvent these problems, because higher intelligence and speed alone would not plausibly fix them, and in fact, a plausible fix might have to be slow, human-mediated, and practical.

One can disagree with that conclusion, but as for the approach, what alternative would you propose when trying to judge AI risk? 

2Veedrac
I think I implicitly answered you elsewhere, though I'll add a more literal response to your question here. On a personal level, none of this is relevant to AI risk. Yudkowsky's interest in it seems like more of a byproduct of his reading choices when he was young and impressionable than anything else, which is not reading I shared. Neither he nor I think this is necessary for xrisk scenarios, with me probably being on the more skeptical side, and me believing more in practical impediments that strongly encourage doing the simple things that work, eg. conventional biotech. Due to this not being a crux and not having the same personal draw towards discussing it, I basically don't think about this when I think about modelling AI risk scenarios. I think about it when it comes up because it's technically interesting. If someone is reasoning about this because they do think it's a crux for their AI risk scenarios, and they came to me for advice, I'd suggest testing that crux before I suggested being more clever about de novo nanotech arguments.

Of interest: Inositol tastes sweet (and otherwise neutral) and is relatively heat stable and soluble; yet it actually has a desirable impact on glucose sensitivity, diabetes, inflammation and obesity.

Meaning you don't have to down it in pill form, which tends to be more expensive - but you can get the powder, and use it as a healthy sugar replacement (within safe dosing limits - don't like, bake cake with it, but I found it a good option to positively affect the flavour other powders I want to down, where I would have otherwise used stevia, which is dubious in large quantities, or erythrol, which can cause gastrointestinal upset; this way, my sugar replacements are more spread out). Kills two birds with one stone.

Researching this is hampered by the fact that most work done on it is in old books that aren't fully online, but the little I have found makes me dubious of your conclusion.

From what I can piece together, that society was, unsurprisingly, ravaged by sexually transmitted diseases (gonorrhoea, granuloma inguinale...) and resulting infertility (the former inflames the female pelvic region and uterus, making intercourse very painful, and scars your fallopian tubes, leading to ectopic pregnancies, which are fatal; the latter causes worsening painful sores that ... (read more)

Well, if you dissect them, you see they are actually nothing alike. They converged on a cool concept - if I surround my offspring with a hard protection and then wrap it in lots of bright, sweet softness, an animal will eat the shell and ingest the offspring without killing the offspring, and deposit it somewhere with fertiliser later - but the way a lemon vs. a cherry is made up is totally different. The number of offspring, their encasement, the way the fruit is structured, its shell, its number, it is a completely different thing. Like different human c... (read more)

Can you give a hint or link as to why that plant is so exciting? A cursory google left me at a loss. I love learning why other people are excited, and sharing their excitement.

2chemslug
I geek out about unusual plants.  I find Welwitschia interesting because it's kind of an outlier.  It's a gymnosperm, meaning it doesn't produce flowers, is wind-pollinated, and forms seeds differently than an angiosperm, but it doesn't look like other gymnosperms.  Central examples of gymnosperms are conifers, with less-central examples being things like cycads and ginkgo trees, but Welwitschia looks nothing like those, or really any other plants I can think of.  It's got a central meristem (growth zone) and two leaves that grow from that meristem at their base.  The plant basically grows by elongating the two leaves, and they can get 4+ meters long.  These things grow in the Namib desert and the wind blows the leaves all over the place and splits them at the veins (which run parallel down the leaves), so the mature plant looks like a pile of dirty green ribbon in the middle of the desert.  Growing 4-meter leaves is also something of an unusual survival strategy for a desert plant.  Like a lot of desert life, they grow slowly and can live a long time (possibly millennia!).  The fact that it's unrelated to other desert plants like cacti or Euphorbias mean we can use it to get another data point about desert adaptation at a genome level as well. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Welwitschia Genome: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-021-24528-4

How can anyone not love biology. Such wonderful madness.

You run into this issue when you want to graft plants. That is, cut a piece of one plant, stick it on another plant whose top you chopped off, stick them together with tape, wait and then have them fuse into one functional plant with the roots of one plant and bearing the fruit of the other, which obviously has fantastic applications, and is done all the time. Seriously. If you plant your apple tree's apples, you get a plant with the properties of your apple tree and whatever your apple tree fucked, w... (read more)

I am sorry, but I am not sure I follow.

My claim was that ChatGPT based on 3.5 has, for lack of any external referent, no way to fully understand language; it has no way to know that words stand for anything, that there is an external reality, that there is a base truth. I then speculated that because it does not understand context and meaning to this degree, while it can learn patterns that follow other patterns, it is much harder for it to deduce whether the grammatical "is" in a particular sentence indicates a logical relationship that can be inverted or... (read more)

This is actually not an uncommon take, but empirical data points in the other direction. I've worked on the topic.

There is a concept called "epistemic injustice", which describes a scenario where you are in a society where something that is happening to you that is objectively wrong is not framed by the society as a crime, specifically not named as such. There are many examples of this, like the idea that a woman cannot be raped by her husband. It is particularly frequent when a new crime develops and we as a society don't immediately recognise it, such as... (read more)

2MSRayne
I never actually said that all these notions are constructed and fake, only that some are. Clearly some aren't. There are false positives and false negatives. I feel as if you're arguing against a straw man here.
2ztzuliios
I think the critical difference is that while marital rape might not be a legal crime, and might not be seen as wrong by people who aren't subjected to it, it's obviously wrong for the person suffering it, and obviously identifiable as coercive and abusive even to the perpetrator.  The spectrum then becomes (recognized as wrong x feels wrong) -> (not recognized as wrong -> feels wrong) -> (recognized as wrong x doesn't feel wrong) -> (not recognized as wrong x doesn't feel wrong).  I think people are only talking about quadrant 3 when saying "sexual abuse attitudes could be [bad]." And that is, like you point out, something that people experience differently, and depends on the specifics of the case rather than the category. It's a near certainty that some of the cases described in this comment are in fact nonconsensual and traumatic, for example. But if someone who did not experience trauma from that practice emigrated to the West and was told over and over again that something deeply traumatic happened to them, this seems like an instance where the problem could be "created out of thin air" as you put it.  Overall, though, the question is whether quadrant 2 or quadrant 3 is bigger, and I think it's very likely that quadrant 3, while existent, is not as large as quadrant 2. Thanks for pointing this out.

You don't think that picture ought to change in the hypothetical parallel scenario of multiple children independently saying that they were sex trafficked by DNC staffers, and also notably saying that they were given reasons for why this was normal and unfixable and in fact probably an average and hence acceptable rate of sex trafficking, reasons and arguments that were directly derived from Democratic positions? 

This is not a random outside accusation to frame the rationalist community. It comes from people drawn to the community for the promise of r... (read more)

That article had me horrified. But I was hoping the reactions would point to empathy and a commitment to concrete improvement. 

The opposite happened, the defensive and at times dismissive or demanding comments made it worse. It was the responses here and on the effective altruism forum that had me reassess EA related groups as likely unsafe to work for.

This sounds like a systematic problem related to the way this community is structured, and the community response seems aimed not at fixing the problem, but at justifying why it isn't getting fixed, abusing rationality to frame abuse as normal and inevitable.

That unfortunately implies nothing. Abusers will rarely abuse everyone they encounter, but pick vulnerable and isolated victims purposefully, and often also purposefully cultivate a public persona that covers their abuse. It is entirely possible and common to work with abusers daily and experience them as charming and lovely while they are absolutely awful to others. I believe you had a great time, but that does not make me believe the victims less in any way, and I would hope this is true for other readers, too.

I think Eliezer's writing are exactly what you would expect from someone who is extremely intelligent, with the common additional factors in highly intelligent people of distrusting authority (because it tends to be less intelligent than you), and only skimming expert texts (because as a child, for most texts you were exposed to, you either understood them immediately, or the texts had issues, so you are interpreting a text that leaves you confused at first as evidence that the text is wrong), while delving with hyperfocus into texts that are often overloo... (read more)

2Said Achmiz
This is not my impression. (I am not an expert, though I studied philosophy, and specifically philosophy of mind, as an undergrad.) From what I know and have read of the debate, Eliezer’s depiction seems accurate. What misrepresentation do you see, specifically? I totally agree here, FWIW.
2Said Achmiz
I doubt this. Please explain more! (My best guess is that this disagreement hinges on equivocation between meanings of the word “consciousness”, but if there’s instead some knowledge of which I’m unaware, I’m eager to learn of it.)
1omnizoid
I think this comment is entirely right until the very end.  I don't think I really attack him as a person--I don't say he's evil or malicious or anything in the vicinity, I just say he's often wrong.  Seems hard to argue that without arguing against his points.  

For me, one of the most helpful things in dealing with imposter syndrome has been this picture: https://plantae.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/ImposterCredited.jpg

Yes, if you surround yourself with competent, knowledgable people, especially people across multiple fields, you will frequently encounter scenarios where they have abilities or knowledge you do not have.

But this should be logically expected, even if you are contributing equally, and it is a good thing, it means you have entered a big pool with big fish who can teach you useful stuff, and who are... (read more)

Thanks for sharing!

The comparison with non-human primates is generally instructive. ChatGPT commits a number of errors that we have seen in non-human primates learning human languages. E.g. initially implicitly self-describing as a human (ask ChatGPT about ethical problems in AI, and you will soon get a "*We* must use AI responsibly"), because their training data was written by humans describing their point of view, and data about a point of view that is non-human is absent, so they latch onto the point of view that seems the closest option at first. ... (read more)

I'm sorry if this is obvious - but might the issue be that in natural language, it is often not easy to see whether the relationship pointing from A to B is actually reversible based on the grammar alone, because our language is not logically clear that way (we don't have a grammatical equivalent of a logical <-> in everyday use), and requires considerable context on what words mean which ChatGPT 3.5 did not yet have? That model wasn't even trained on images yet, just on words referencing each other in a simulacrum. It is honestly impressive how comp... (read more)

6Owain_Evans
These are reasonable thoughts to have but we do test for them in the paper. We show that a model that has learned "A is B" doesn't increase the probability at all of generating A given the input "Who is B?". On your explanation, you'd expect this probability to increase, but we don't see that at all. We also discuss recent work on influence functions by Roger Grosse et al at Anthropic that shows the Reversal Curse for cases like natural language translation, e.g. "A is translated as B". Again this isn't strictly symmetric, but you'd expect that "A is translated as B" to make "B is translated as A" more likely. 
2MichaelStJules
I had a similar thought about "A is B" vs "B is A", but "A is the B" should reverse to "The B is A" and vice versa when the context is held constant and nothing changes the fact, because "is" implies that it's the present condition and "the" implies uniqueness. However, it might be trained on old and no longer correct writing or that includes quotes about past states of affairs. Some context might still be missing, too, e.g. for "A is the president", president of what? It would still be a correct inference to say "The president is A" in the same context, at least, and some others, but not all. Also, the present condition can change quickly, e.g. "The time is 5:21:31 pm EST" and "5:21:31 pm EST is the time" quickly become false, but I think these are rare exceptions in our use of language.

They specifically didn't talk about it and pretended the animals died of something else, but they got a bunch of young macaques to gruesomely and slowly die from it. https://www.theverge.com/2023/9/20/23882888/elon-musk-brain-implant-startup-neuralink-monkeys-euthanized Detailed report is worth reading; their own report is plain incompatible with competent, ethical and responsible procedure, and trying to imagine how the macaques (higher primates with self-awareness) experienced this is horrifying. Having an infected, loose brain implant dangling and dripp... (read more)

Load More