Quick takes

Jobst and I want to improve AI-safety by supplementing RLHF with a consensus generating voting system. Last week we did a small experiment at a conference. Here is the poster we used to explain this idea to the attendants: Here's the PDF

I gave talk about my Accelerating Alignment with LLMs agenda about 1 month ago (which is basically a decade in AI tools time). Part of the agenda covered (publicly) here. I will maybe write an actual post about the agenda soon, but would love to have some people who are willing to look over it. If you are interested, send me a message. I am currently applying for grants and exploring the possibility of building an org focused on speeding up this agenda and avoid spreading myself too thin.

"The AI Dilemma" presentation by Center for Humane Technology: specifically the speakers Tristan Harris and Asa Raskin  is the most compelling case for slowing down and getting more cautious “moving at the speed of getting it right” with generative AI I’ve heard. How might we get more people to give it a listen?  https://pod.link/1460030305/episode/f4415952ef979f94cf5a55e19fc80bd8

Project Idea: 'Cost to save a life' interactive calculator promotion What about making and promoting a ‘how much does it cost to save a life’ quiz and calculator.  This could be adjustable/customizable (in my country, around the world, of an infant/child/adult, counting ‘value added life years’ etc.) … and trying to make it go viral (or at least bacterial) as in the ‘how rich am I’ calculator?  The case  1. People might really be interested in this… it’s super-compelling (a bit click-baity, maybe, but the payoff is not click bait)! 2. May make some news headlines too (it’s an “easy story” for media people, asks a question people can engage with, etc. … ’how much does it cost to save a life? find out after the break!) 3. if people do think it’s much cheaper than it is, as some studies suggest, it would probably be good to change this conception… to help us build a reality-based impact-based evidence-based community and society of donors 4. similarly, it could get people thinking about ‘how to really measure impact’ --> consider EA-aligned evaluations more seriously While GiveWell has a page with a lot of tech details, but it’s not compelling or interactive  in the way I suggest above, and I doubt  they market it heavily. GWWC probably doesn't have the design/engineering time for this (not to mention refining this for accuracy and communication).  But if someone else (UX design, research support, IT) could do the legwork I think they might be very happy to host it.  It could also mesh well with academic-linked research so I may have  some ‘Meta academic support ads’ funds that could work with this.   Tags/backlinks (~testing out this new feature)  @GiveWell  @Giving What We Can Projects I'd like to see  EA Projects I'd Like to See   Idea: Curated database of quick-win tangible, attributable projects 

Tweet Google's model

Does anyone have a recommendation for a resource to read on dependency injection? I'm considering whether to add the pattern to the ForumMagnum codebase. My current state is that I have a tentative grasp of the concept and roughly the pros and cons, but not really a practical grasp of it, or of how it's played out in a typescript codebase.

Dumb question: how do y'all remember that a niche technology exists? Like, I learned that .git-blame-ignore-revs existed, but I'm next going to need that information in like 2 months, and by then I will have forgotten about it. I could put it in Anki, but that feels like an overly heavy tool for this job. Maybe a very easy Anki card is the answer? I might have convinced myself that's ok. Still, interested in other takes! I know not all of y'all use Anki. (For some reason.)