Thanks a lot for giving more context. I really appreciate it.
These were not “AI Safety” grants
These grants come from Open Philanthropy’s focus area “Potential Risks from Advanced AI”. I think it’s fair to say they are “AI Safety” grants.
Importantly, the awarded grants were to be disbursed over several years for an academic institution, so much of the work which was funded may not have started or been published. Critiquing old or unrelated papers doesn’t accurately reflect the grant’s impact.
Fair point. I agree old papers might not accurately reflect the grant’s impact, but they correlate.
Your criticisms of the papers lack depth … Do you do research in this area, …
I totally agree. That’s why I shared this post as a question. I’m not an expert in the area and I wanted an expert to give me context.
Could you please update your post to address these issues and provide a more accurate representation of the grants and the lab’s work?
I added an update linking to your answer.
Overall, I’m concerned about Open Philanthropy’s granting. I have nothing against Thompson or his lab’s work.
Thanks a lot for giving more context. I really appreciate it.
These grants come from Open Philanthropy’s focus area “Potential Risks from Advanced AI”. I think it’s fair to say they are “AI Safety” grants.
Fair point. I agree old papers might not accurately reflect the grant’s impact, but they correlate.
I totally agree. That’s why I shared this post as a question. I’m not an expert in the area and I wanted an expert to give me context.
I added an update linking to your answer.
Overall, I’m concerned about Open Philanthropy’s granting. I have nothing against Thompson or his lab’s work.