Under all circumstances this is just a terrible day for EA. If the accusations are even half-accurate then I am appalled. If the accusations donāt hold water, then I am also appalled.
I donāt have an informed opinion as to whether it was correct to publish without waiting for Nonlinear to prepare a response. Iām leaning towards thinking it was the right decision given the supposed threatening behavior of nonlinear leadership.
With that said, I wouldencourage most readers to wait with making up their mind until Nonlinear has had a chance to leave a response. Save your sanity, block this thread from your browser, and come back in a few weeks once the dust has settled.
Witch hunts do happen among well-intentioned people. I have many more thoughts I want to share, but this is not the right time or place.
I donāt really see the āterrible day for EAā part? Maybe you think Nonlinear is more integral to EA as a whole than I do. To me it seems like an allegation of bad behaviour on the part of a notable but relatively minor actor in the space, that doesnāt seem to particularly reflect a broader pattern.
I donāt necessarily disagree with you, but FWIW I think Sam Bankman-Freid and Alameda would have been honestly described as āa notable but relatively minor actor in the spaceā during the many years when they were building their resource base, hiring, getting funds, and during which time people knew multiple serious accusations about him/āthem. I am here trying to execute an algorithm that catches bad actors before they become too powerful. I think Emerson is very ambitious and would like a powerful role in EA/āX-risk/āetc.
I agree with this, and think it could have been a terrible day for EA if stuff like this surfaced later in a world where Nonlinear had become more influential. But thankfully* weāre not in that world.
(* Thankfully assuming the allegations are broadly true etc etc.)
Considering these accusations (in some form or another) have been out for longer than a year, and non-linear has continued to be well respected by the community, I am worried that further ādeadline pushingā only serves to launder nonlinearās reputation. I am suspicious of the idea that many who write for the need to āhear both sidesā will indeed update if nonlinearās response is uncompelling.
I think that Ben probably should have waited the week.
At the same time, Iām still expecting to have a strongly negative opinion about Nonlinearās leadershipās actions after seeing whatever they end up publishing.
Under all circumstances this is just a terrible day for EA. If the accusations are even half-accurate then I am appalled. If the accusations donāt hold water, then I am also appalled.
I donāt have an informed opinion as to whether it was correct to publish without waiting for Nonlinear to prepare a response. Iām leaning towards thinking it was the right decision given the supposed threatening behavior of nonlinear leadership.
With that said, I would encourage most readers to wait with making up their mind until Nonlinear has had a chance to leave a response. Save your sanity, block this thread from your browser, and come back in a few weeks once the dust has settled.
Witch hunts do happen among well-intentioned people. I have many more thoughts I want to share, but this is not the right time or place.
I donāt really see the āterrible day for EAā part? Maybe you think Nonlinear is more integral to EA as a whole than I do. To me it seems like an allegation of bad behaviour on the part of a notable but relatively minor actor in the space, that doesnāt seem to particularly reflect a broader pattern.
I donāt necessarily disagree with you, but FWIW I think Sam Bankman-Freid and Alameda would have been honestly described as āa notable but relatively minor actor in the spaceā during the many years when they were building their resource base, hiring, getting funds, and during which time people knew multiple serious accusations about him/āthem. I am here trying to execute an algorithm that catches bad actors before they become too powerful. I think Emerson is very ambitious and would like a powerful role in EA/āX-risk/āetc.
I agree with this, and think it could have been a terrible day for EA if stuff like this surfaced later in a world where Nonlinear had become more influential. But thankfully* weāre not in that world.
(* Thankfully assuming the allegations are broadly true etc etc.)
Considering these accusations (in some form or another) have been out for longer than a year, and non-linear has continued to be well respected by the community, I am worried that further ādeadline pushingā only serves to launder nonlinearās reputation. I am suspicious of the idea that many who write for the need to āhear both sidesā will indeed update if nonlinearās response is uncompelling.
I think that Ben probably should have waited the week.
At the same time, Iām still expecting to have a strongly negative opinion about Nonlinearās leadershipās actions after seeing whatever they end up publishing.
Disclaimer: I formerly interned at Nonlinear.