Executive summary: A candid, personal case for (maybe) applying to Forethought’s research roles by 1 November: the org’s mission is to navigate the transition to superintelligent AI by tackling underexplored, pre-paradigmatic questions; it offers a supportive, high-disagreement, philosophy-friendly environment with solid ops and management, but it’s small, not a fit for fully blue-sky independence, and the author notes cultural/worldview gaps they want to broaden (tone: invitational and self-aware rather than hard-sell; personal reflection).
Key points:
Roles and incentives: Forethought is hiring Senior Research Fellows (lead your own agenda) and Research Fellows (develop views while collaborating), plus possible 3–12 month visiting fellows; referral bonus up to £10k (Senior) / £5k (Research), and the application is short with a Nov 1 deadline.
Why Forethought: Its niche is neglected, concept-forming work on AI macrostrategy (e.g., AI-enabled coups, pathways to flourishing, intelligence explosion dynamics, existential security tools), aiming to surface questions others miss and build clearer conceptual models.
Research environment: Benefits include close collaboration, fast high-context feedback, protection from distortive incentives (status games, quick-karma topics), strong operations, and hands-on management that helps convert messy ideas into publishable work and sustain motivation.
Tradeoffs and culture: Expect some institutional asks (feedback on drafts, org decisions), not total freedom in topic choice, and a culture of open disagreement and heavy philosophy; author thinks the team’s worldview range is too narrow and collaboration/feedback timing could improve.
Who might fit: No specific credentials required; prized traits are curiosity about AI, comfort with pre-paradigmatic confusion, willingness to try/ditch frames, skepticism plus openness, flexibility across abstraction levels, and clear written communication.
Epistemic stance: This is a personal take, not an institutional pitch; the author enjoys the team and day-to-day atmosphere, acknowledges biases, and frames Forethought as a strong option for some—but not all—researchers interested in shaping society’s path through rapid AI progress.
This comment was auto-generated by the EA Forum Team. Feel free to point out issues with this summary by replying to the comment, andcontact us if you have feedback.
Executive summary: A candid, personal case for (maybe) applying to Forethought’s research roles by 1 November: the org’s mission is to navigate the transition to superintelligent AI by tackling underexplored, pre-paradigmatic questions; it offers a supportive, high-disagreement, philosophy-friendly environment with solid ops and management, but it’s small, not a fit for fully blue-sky independence, and the author notes cultural/worldview gaps they want to broaden (tone: invitational and self-aware rather than hard-sell; personal reflection).
Key points:
Roles and incentives: Forethought is hiring Senior Research Fellows (lead your own agenda) and Research Fellows (develop views while collaborating), plus possible 3–12 month visiting fellows; referral bonus up to £10k (Senior) / £5k (Research), and the application is short with a Nov 1 deadline.
Why Forethought: Its niche is neglected, concept-forming work on AI macrostrategy (e.g., AI-enabled coups, pathways to flourishing, intelligence explosion dynamics, existential security tools), aiming to surface questions others miss and build clearer conceptual models.
Research environment: Benefits include close collaboration, fast high-context feedback, protection from distortive incentives (status games, quick-karma topics), strong operations, and hands-on management that helps convert messy ideas into publishable work and sustain motivation.
Tradeoffs and culture: Expect some institutional asks (feedback on drafts, org decisions), not total freedom in topic choice, and a culture of open disagreement and heavy philosophy; author thinks the team’s worldview range is too narrow and collaboration/feedback timing could improve.
Who might fit: No specific credentials required; prized traits are curiosity about AI, comfort with pre-paradigmatic confusion, willingness to try/ditch frames, skepticism plus openness, flexibility across abstraction levels, and clear written communication.
Epistemic stance: This is a personal take, not an institutional pitch; the author enjoys the team and day-to-day atmosphere, acknowledges biases, and frames Forethought as a strong option for some—but not all—researchers interested in shaping society’s path through rapid AI progress.
This comment was auto-generated by the EA Forum Team. Feel free to point out issues with this summary by replying to the comment, and contact us if you have feedback.