All of Rasool's Comments + Replies

Rasool10

Not withstanding

Stigler’s Law of Eponymy: “No scientific discovery is named after its original discoverer.”

:P 

Rasool10

Ege Erdil 02:51:22

I think another important thing is just that AIs can be aligned. You get to control the preferences of your AI systems in a way that you don’t really get to control the preference of your workers. Your workers, you can just select, you don’t really have any other option. But for your AIs, you can fine tune them. You can build AI systems which have the kind of preferences that you want. And you can imagine that’s dramatically changing basic problems that determine the structure of human firms.
For example, the principal agent problem might

... (read more)
2Chris_Leong
There's lots of things that "might" happen. When we're talking about the future of humanity, we can't afford to just glaze over mights.
Rasool30

Might Leopold Aschenbrenner also be involved? He runs an investment fund with money from Nat Friedman, Daniel Gross, and Patrick Collison, so the investment in Mechanize might have come from that?

https://situationalawarenesslp.com/

https://www.forourposterity.com/

Rasool30

Does this match your understanding?

 

AI CompanyPublic/Preview NameHypothesized Base ModelHypothesized EnhancementNotes
OpenAIGPT-4oGPT-4oNone (Baseline)The starting point, multimodal model.
OpenAIo1GPT-4oReasoningFirst reasoning model iteration, built on the GPT-4o base. Analogous to Anthropic's Sonnet 3.7 w/ Reasoning.
OpenAIGPT-4.1GPT-4.1NoneAn incremental upgrade to the base model beyond GPT-4o.
OpenAIo3GPT-4.1ReasoningPrice/cutoff suggest it uses the newer GPT-4.1 base, not GPT-4o + reasoning.
OpenAIGPT-4.5GPT-4.5NoneA major base model upgrade
OpenAIGPT-
... (read more)
1Anomalous
Where does o4-mini fall in this table? 4.1 + reasoning + enhancements, or 4.5 + reasoning - size? 
Rasool10

I actually ended up listening to this episode and found it quite high-signal. Lex kept his peace-and-love-kumbaya stuff to a minimum and Dylan and Nathan actually went quite deep on specifics like innovations in Deepseek V3/R1/R1Zero, and hardware and export controls

Rasool40

Matt Levine, in response to:

If you lie to board members about other board members in an attempt to gain control over the board, I assert that the board should fire you, pretty much no matter what

 writes:

No! Wrong! Not no matter what! In a normal company with good governance, absolutely. Lying to the board is the main bad thing that the CEO can do, from a certain perspective. But there are definitely some companies — Elon Musk runs like eight of them, but also OpenAI — where, if you lie to board members about other board members in

... (read more)
Rasool30

Am I correct in thinking that you posted this a couple of days ago (with a different title - now deleted), and this version has no substantial changes?

2claudio
Yes! The reason being that when you do your first post it takes ~2 days to get it actually published: by virtue of the LW sorting algorithm, nobody saw it because it's "old" by the time it's out. I'm happy I got some feedback now
1Mo Putera
Thanks! Added to the list.
Rasool10

The 200k GPU number has been mentioned since October (Elon tweet, Nvidia announcement), so are you saying that that they managed to get the model trained so fast is what beat the predictions you heard?

Rasool10

I met someone in SF doing this but cannot remember the name of the company! If I remember I'll let you know

One idea I thought would be cool related to this is to have several LLMs with different 'personalities' each giving different kinds of feedback. Eg. a 'critic', an 'aesthete', a 'layperson', so just like in Google Docs where you get comments from different people, here you can get inline feedback from different kinds of readers 

2Milan W
The Pantheon interface features comments by different LLM personas.
Rasool10

There is usually a Google Sheet export of the Swapcard data provided, which makes this easier - but at previous conferences other attendees were apprehensive when informed that people were doing this

Rasool20

Haven't used it much but dexa.ai tries to let you interact with podcast episodes, here's this episode:

https://dexa.ai/d/e2fc9f6e-e1d5-11ef-8e88-ffec9447dc76

-1Mo Putera
Much appreciated, thanks!
Rasool10

What do you make of Hynix?

Rasool50

There is a very good Rationally Speaking podcast episode about this - one solution that is proposed by economist Ami Glazer is to not restrict pricing, but then issue vouchers or cash to those who need it. Glazer brings up that this is how the food stamp system works at present

That episode goes into other topics around this issue, like hoarding, rationing, positive externalities (eg. face masks protect not just the wearer but those around them)

Rasool51

A bit of a tangent, but economist Alex Tabarrok has talked about buying coal mines in order to not mine coal

One of the challenges until recently (as outlined in that link) was:

There are also some crazy “use it or lose it” laws that say that you can’t buy the right to extract a natural resource and not use it. When the high-bidder for an oil and gas lease near Arches National Park turned out to be an environmentalist the BLM cancelled the contract!

1Double
I’m pretty sure there’s no such use it or lose it law for patents, since patent trolls already exist. 
Rasool*20

This is another one that was doing the rounds in the UK progress / YIMBY / growth space:

https://ukfoundations.co/

1davekasten
Ooh, interesting, thank you!
Rasool30

How interesting, I was curious about copyright etc but this is annotated by the author himself!

Rasool1-2

Base rates, historical context, it is debated in this highly-upvoted post

Rasool1-2

I don't think this post deserves to be downvoted so much (currently sitting at -11)

Even if one disagrees with the main thesis, it's not a low-quality post, and does add to the debate

2Geraldine Joffre
I agree the post presents good arguments and doesn't deserve so many downvotes. It reminds me of a post from Timothy B. Lee that I found particularly refreshing in this debate. It lists seven advantages human workers have over AI and I don't think it would be right to dismiss those.
3ChristianKl
What does it add to the debate?