Software engineering, parenting, cognition, meditation, other
Linkedin, Facebook, Admonymous (anonymous feedback)
Why do you think that is the case? I mean a) why do they reveal that only after a few drinks and b) why was that the convincing story - and not HPMoR?
[Linkpost] China's AI OVERPRODUCTION
China seeks to commoditize their complements. So, over the following months, I expect a complete blitz of Chinese open-source AI models for everything from computer vision to robotics to image generation.
If true, what effects would that have on the AI race and AI governance?
Yes! That's the right intuition. And the LLMs are doing the same - but we don't know their world model, and thus, the direction of the simplification can be arbitrarily off.
Drilling down on the simplifications, as suggested by Villiam might help.
This is an interesting UI proposal and, if done right, might provide the needed transparency. Most people wouldn't read it, but some would, esp. for critical answers.
Yes, but it didn't mean that AIs could do all kinds of long tasks in 2005. And that is the conclusion many people seem to draw from the METR paper.
as we use the term, yes. But the point (and I should have made that more clear) is that any mismodeling of the parent of the interests of the child's interests and future environment will not be visible to the child or even someone reading the thoughts of the well-meaning parent. So many parents want the best for their child, but model the future of the child wrongly (mostly by status quo bias; the problem is different for AI).
It is a decent metric for chess but a) it doesn't generalize to other tasks (as people seem to interpret the METR paper), and less importantly, b) I'm quite confident that people wouldn't beat the chess engines by thinking for years.
No? It means you can't beat the chess engine.
And even if - they try to argue in the other direction: If it takes the human time X at time T it will take the AI duration L. That didn't work for chess either.
That we would have AIs performing year-long tasks in 2005. Chess is not the same as software engineering but it is still a limited domain.
Sure, but presumably that brought them to LW where AI safety is a topic.
But maybe the point at which you get into AI safety is less clear once you are on LW. And FO is a something that can more clearly named. So it could all just be availability heuristic.