Hi Sol3:2. This comment raises an issue that appears to have struck a chord with many readers. However, we believe that it is unnecessarily sarcastic and breaks Forum norms. This is a warning, please do better in the future.
I think you may have a model where you don’t want to have comments above a given level of rudeness/sarcasm/impoliteness/political incorrectness, etc. However, I would prefer that you had a model where you give a warning or a ban if a comment or a user exceeds some rudeness—value threshold, as I think that would provide more value: I would want to have the rude comments if they produce enough value to be worth it.
And I think that you do want to have the disagreeable people push back, to discourage fake group consensus.
I mean, I think it exceeds some level of rudeness in that you consider the hypothesis that Karnofsky might not be an impeccable boy scout, which some people might consider to be rude. But I also think that it’s fine to exceed that threshold, so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
”How much of Anthropic does Daniela own? How much does your brother in law own?” (both entirely sincere and legitimate questions—this is very material nonpublic knowledge)
”If my family was in line to become billionaires many times over due to a certain AI lab becoming successful, this would certainly affect my takes.” (this is literally true—I know myself quite well and am very confident that my reasoning would be incredibly motivated if I personally had billions, perhaps tens of billions on the line)
Hi Sol3:2. This comment raises an issue that appears to have struck a chord with many readers. However, we believe that it is unnecessarily sarcastic and breaks Forum norms. This is a warning, please do better in the future.
I think you may have a model where you don’t want to have comments above a given level of rudeness/sarcasm/impoliteness/political incorrectness, etc. However, I would prefer that you had a model where you give a warning or a ban if a comment or a user exceeds some rudeness—value threshold, as I think that would provide more value: I would want to have the rude comments if they produce enough value to be worth it.
And I think that you do want to have the disagreeable people push back, to discourage fake group consensus.
I really don’t even think my comment was rude. Absolutely massive “not allowed to tackle Carter in this game” energy on the EA forum tbqh
I mean, I think it exceeds some level of rudeness in that you consider the hypothesis that Karnofsky might not be an impeccable boy scout, which some people might consider to be rude. But I also think that it’s fine to exceed that threshold, so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
You must be joking. What on earth was sarcastic?
Let’s go line by line.
“This is really amazing” (I was amazed).
”How much of Anthropic does Daniela own? How much does your brother in law own?” (both entirely sincere and legitimate questions—this is very material nonpublic knowledge)
”If my family was in line to become billionaires many times over due to a certain AI lab becoming successful, this would certainly affect my takes.” (this is literally true—I know myself quite well and am very confident that my reasoning would be incredibly motivated if I personally had billions, perhaps tens of billions on the line)
I think the assumption is that most people already knew about the facts disclosed