I agree that misuse is a concern. Unlike alignment, I think it’s relatively tractable because it’s more similar to problems people are encountering in the world right now.
To address it, we can monitor and restrict usage as needed. The same tools that Elicit provides for reasoning can also be used to reason about whether a use case constitutes misuse.
This isn’t to say that we might not need to invest a lot of resources eventually, and it’s interestingly related to alignment (“misuse” is relative to some values), but it feels a bit less open-ended.
I agree that misuse is a concern. Unlike alignment, I think it’s relatively tractable because it’s more similar to problems people are encountering in the world right now.
To address it, we can monitor and restrict usage as needed. The same tools that Elicit provides for reasoning can also be used to reason about whether a use case constitutes misuse.
This isn’t to say that we might not need to invest a lot of resources eventually, and it’s interestingly related to alignment (“misuse” is relative to some values), but it feels a bit less open-ended.
[debugging further]
Do you think misuse is a concern—to the point that if you couldn’t monitor and restrict usage—you’d think twice about this product direction?
Or is this more “this is a small issue, and we can even monitor and restrict usage, but even if we couldn’t then we wouldn’t really mind”?
What are your views on whether speeding up technological development is, in general, a good thing?
I’m thinking of arguments like https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/gB2ad4jYANYirYyzh/a-note-about-differential-technological-development, that make me wonder if we should try to slow research instead of speeding it up.
Or do you think that Elicit will not speed up AGI capabilities research in a meaningful way? (Maybe because it will count as misuse)
It’s something I’m really uncertain about personally, that’s going to heavily influence my decisions/life, so I’m really curious about your thoughts!