Thanks for this! For the more governance-oriented questions (specifically, the 2nd-4th questions under AI strategy, and the 1st question about takeoff dynamics), how useful do you (or others) think deep experience with relevant governance organizations is? I wonder what explains the apparent difference between the approach suggested by this post (which I read as not emphasizing gaining relevant experience, and instead suggesting “just start trying to figure this stuff out”) and the approach suggested by this other post:
If you want to try this kind of work [contributing to research that may provide greater strategic clarity in the future, in the context of AI governance], in most cases I recommend that you [among other things] gain experience working in relevant parts of key governments and/or a top AI lab (ideally both) so that you acquire a detailed picture of the opportunities and constraints those actors operate with.
(Maybe it’s that people can test their fit without much experience, but would get lots of value out of that experience for actually doing this work?)
I think “people can test their fit without much experience, but would get lots of value out of that experience for actually doing this work” is pretty valid, though I’ll also comment that I think there are diminishing returns to direct experience—I think getting some experience (or at least exposure, e.g. via conversation with insiders) is important, but I don’t think one necessarily needs several years inside key institutions in order to be helpful on problems like these.
Thanks for this! For the more governance-oriented questions (specifically, the 2nd-4th questions under AI strategy, and the 1st question about takeoff dynamics), how useful do you (or others) think deep experience with relevant governance organizations is? I wonder what explains the apparent difference between the approach suggested by this post (which I read as not emphasizing gaining relevant experience, and instead suggesting “just start trying to figure this stuff out”) and the approach suggested by this other post:
(Maybe it’s that people can test their fit without much experience, but would get lots of value out of that experience for actually doing this work?)
I think “people can test their fit without much experience, but would get lots of value out of that experience for actually doing this work” is pretty valid, though I’ll also comment that I think there are diminishing returns to direct experience—I think getting some experience (or at least exposure, e.g. via conversation with insiders) is important, but I don’t think one necessarily needs several years inside key institutions in order to be helpful on problems like these.