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 don’t hold water, then I am also appalled.
I don’t have an informed opinion as to whether it was correct to publish without waiting for Nonlinear to prepare a response. I’m 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 don’t really see the “terrible day for EA” 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 doesn’t seem to particularly reflect a broader pattern.
I don’t necessarily disagree with you, but FWIW I think Sam Bankman-Freid and Alameda would have been honestly described as “a notable but relatively minor actor in the space” 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/them. 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/X-risk/etc.
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* we’re 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 “deadline pushing” only serves to launder nonlinear’s reputation. I am suspicious of the idea that many who write for the need to “hear both sides” will indeed update if nonlinear’s response is uncompelling.
I think that Ben probably should have waited the week.
At the same time, I’m still expecting to have a strongly negative opinion about Nonlinear’s leadership’s 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 don’t hold water, then I am also appalled.
I don’t have an informed opinion as to whether it was correct to publish without waiting for Nonlinear to prepare a response. I’m 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 don’t really see the “terrible day for EA” 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 doesn’t seem to particularly reflect a broader pattern.
I don’t necessarily disagree with you, but FWIW I think Sam Bankman-Freid and Alameda would have been honestly described as “a notable but relatively minor actor in the space” 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/them. 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/X-risk/etc.
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* we’re 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 “deadline pushing” only serves to launder nonlinear’s reputation. I am suspicious of the idea that many who write for the need to “hear both sides” will indeed update if nonlinear’s response is uncompelling.
I think that Ben probably should have waited the week.
At the same time, I’m still expecting to have a strongly negative opinion about Nonlinear’s leadership’s actions after seeing whatever they end up publishing.
Disclaimer: I formerly interned at Nonlinear.