Thanks for explaining your thoughts on AI safety, it's much appreciated.
I think in general when trying to do good in the world, we should strive for actions that have a high expected value and a low potential downside risk.
I can imagine a high expected value case for Anthropic. But I don't see how Anthropic has few potential downsides. I'm very worried that by participating in the race to AGI, p(doom) might increase.
For an example pointed out in the comments here by habryka:
...I mean, didn't the capabilities of Claude leak specifically to OpenAI employees, so
While this might be a great way to earn money (assuming competitors won't invest similarly in AI soon enough), but aren't there good reasons not to invest in AI capabilities, like reducing P(doom)?
Also I assume it's wise to mention you're not a financial adviser and don't bear responsibility for actions people take because of your comment (same counts for me).
Hey Bruno! I'm an organiser for EA Brussels and would love to collaborate this on (ex. by making a facebook event on the EA Brussels page/group). Would love it if you could reach out to me :)
https://www.facebook.com/jeroen.willems.7528/
or jeroen at eabrussels dot org
Not me assuming kratom was a made-up word haha.
Awesome comic! You captured the recurring traits really really well.