How do EA anchor institutions plan to operationalize changes based on these critiques? There seems to be a bit of a pattern in some that I’ve read where people point out problems and then nothing changes.
This is a really good question, and I’m curious whether the contest organizers have anything planned. I’d love to see some sort of after the fact analysis of whether this contest led to meaningful changes or whether it looks more like kabuki theater with hindsight. I’d be interested in looking at this question from multiple perspectives, e.g. having the largest EA organizations self-report whether they’ve updated in any way, and asking authors of contest contributions (or a subset of prize winners and/or posts that cleared a certain karma threshold) whether they think their concerns have been addressed.
I would think some sort of retrospective evaluation would be an important part of deciding whether or not to run another Red Teaming contest in the future.
How do EA anchor institutions plan to operationalize changes based on these critiques? There seems to be a bit of a pattern in some that I’ve read where people point out problems and then nothing changes.
This is a really good question, and I’m curious whether the contest organizers have anything planned. I’d love to see some sort of after the fact analysis of whether this contest led to meaningful changes or whether it looks more like kabuki theater with hindsight. I’d be interested in looking at this question from multiple perspectives, e.g. having the largest EA organizations self-report whether they’ve updated in any way, and asking authors of contest contributions (or a subset of prize winners and/or posts that cleared a certain karma threshold) whether they think their concerns have been addressed.
I would think some sort of retrospective evaluation would be an important part of deciding whether or not to run another Red Teaming contest in the future.