Comments
More from the author
Curated and popular this week
78
Cross-posted from my Substack.
Epistemic status: I’ve puzzled over this for a long time but I’m not sure I came to the right answers. I'm sharing this partly because it might help others work on resource allocation, but mostly because some smarter reader might tell me how to do it better.
TL;DR:
* I he...
...
With the AI windfall, mental health may be taken increasingly seriously by mainstream EA. There’s increasingly room to explore the cause area and answer some of the biggest uncertainties; at the same time, costs of the most effective interventions are continuing to fall. StrongMinds is now treating for ~$35, about a third of GiveWell’s best guess from a few years ago, and is expected to...
Recent opportunities to take action
Thanks for sharing this.
What’s your view on “why doesn’t OpenAI slow down work on capabilities to allow more time for alignment research?”
Is it
OpenAI is worried that Deepmind might build AGI before OpenAI, and OpenAI is worried that Deepmind is more likely to build AGI unsafely or misuse it
OpenAI is worried that another group we aren’t aware of yet might build AGI before OpenAI and Deepmind, and OpenAI is worried that this group is more likely to build AGI unsafely or misuse it
OpenAI is already only scaling up capabilities where it allows them to do better alignment research
OpenAI is in practice prioritising revenue over existential risk mitigation, despite claiming not to
something else / a mix
I think that OpenAI is not worried about actors like DeepMind misusing AGI, but (a) is worried about actors that might not currently be on most people's radar misusing AGI, (b) thinks that scaling up capabilities enables better alignment research (but sees other benefits to scaling up capabilities too) and (c) is earning revenue for reasons other than direct existential risk reduction where it does not see a conflict in doing so.