@PeterSlattery I want to push back on the idea about “regular” movement building versus “meta”. It sounds like you have a fair amount of experience in movement building. I’m not sure I agree that you went meta here, but if you had, am not convinced that would be a bad thing, particularly given the subject matter.
I have only read one of your posts so far, but appreciated it. I think you are wise to try and facilitate the creation of a more cohesive theory of change, especially if inadvertently doing harm is a significant risk.
As someone on the periphery and not working in AI safety but who has tried to understand it a bit, I feel pretty confused as I haven’t encountered much in the way of strategy and corresponding tactics. I imagine this might be quite frustrating and demotivating for those working in the field.
I agree with the anonymous submission that broader perspectives would likely be quite valuable.
@PeterSlattery I want to push back on the idea about “regular” movement building versus “meta”. It sounds like you have a fair amount of experience in movement building. I’m not sure I agree that you went meta here, but if you had, am not convinced that would be a bad thing, particularly given the subject matter.
I have only read one of your posts so far, but appreciated it. I think you are wise to try and facilitate the creation of a more cohesive theory of change, especially if inadvertently doing harm is a significant risk.
As someone on the periphery and not working in AI safety but who has tried to understand it a bit, I feel pretty confused as I haven’t encountered much in the way of strategy and corresponding tactics. I imagine this might be quite frustrating and demotivating for those working in the field.
I agree with the anonymous submission that broader perspectives would likely be quite valuable.
Thanks for the thoughts, I really appreciate that you took the time to share them.