Probably very little? While there's a chance that depositors will take a haircut, that haircut is likely to be modest. The larger issue for depositors may be loss of access to funds for a while, although I expect next week's advance payment will be substantial. And if I had money, I'd lend it with very little hesitation with the uninsured deposits as collateral -- would probably want something like 1.10 in deposits backing 1 in loans to be safe.
Such a large percentage of SVB deposits were uninsured that there isn't going to be a concentration of losses in that class the way there might be at other banks.
If a major funder has significant exposure to SVB bonds or stock, that might be a different story.
The FDIC, Federal Reserve, and Treasury announced that depositors will be fully protected, and have access to all of their money starting 2023-03-13, so any EA-destined funds at SVB should be fine.
[Question]
What does Silicon Valley Bank’s collapse mean for the funding situation of EA?
Crossposted to Less Wrong
‘Like most of life’s dangers, the dangers of artificial intelligence are not easily identified from the armchair.’
J Dmitri Gallow
Epistemic status
I’m not an expert in this field, and herein I make some sweeping generalisations educated guesses about the overall...
Let’s imagine it’s November 2031. We’re both still here, AI is much more capable than it is today, but governments are governing, civilisation is still (mostly) civilised, and there has been no catastrophic loss of control. It just kind of didn’t happen.
What happens to the AI safety field then?
I expect people who currently believe catastrophe could happen within two or three years will start saying five or ten years. Then 15. Then ‘who cares if we’re a few decades of...
Thanks to Bruce Friedrich, Seth Ariel Green, Tobias Leenaert, Jan Willem Bolderdijk, Martine van Haperen, Herman Rohrbach, Chris Popa and Elizabeth Alvarez for comments. Claude helped structure the text. Ideas and mistakes are my own. I currently work with ProVeg International. The prize I propose would be defined and judged by an independent committee, and its money would fund scaling the winning solution(s), not ProVeg or the winner.
TL/DR
* EA could d...
[Update: As to depositors, see Jeff's comment.]
Probably very little? While there's a chance that depositors will take a haircut, that haircut is likely to be modest. The larger issue for depositors may be loss of access to funds for a while, although I expect next week's advance payment will be substantial. And if I had money, I'd lend it with very little hesitation with the uninsured deposits as collateral -- would probably want something like 1.10 in deposits backing 1 in loans to be safe.
Such a large percentage of SVB deposits were uninsured that there isn't going to be a concentration of losses in that class the way there might be at other banks.
If a major funder has significant exposure to SVB bonds or stock, that might be a different story.