I think chapter 4, The Kinetics of an Intelligence Explosion, has a lot of terms and arguments from EY’s posts in the FOOM Debate. (I’ve been surprised by this in the past, thinking Bostrom invented the terms, then finding things like resource overhangs getting explicitly defined in the FOOM Debate.)
Ben Pace
Karma: 3,879
Yeah, well, I haven’t thought about this case much, so maybe there’s some good counterargument, but I think of personal attacks as “this person’s hair looks ugly” or “this person isn’t fun at parties”, not “this person is not strong in an area of the job that I think is key”. Professional criticism seems quite different from personal attacks, and I hold different norms around how appropriate it is to bring up in public contexts.
Sure, it’s a challenge to someone to be professionally criticized, and can easily be unpleasant, but it’s not irrelevant or off-topic and can easily be quite valuable and important.
Hi, can you give an example of a speculative personal attack in the post that you’re referring to?
Feedback that the following page had like 1-2 letters width of horizontal scroll when I loaded on iPad.
Added: this page too:
https://www.openphilanthropy.org/open-philanthropy-course-development-grants/
Habryka left a lot of the relevant comments. My main positive is the separation of blogposts and research reports, I think that is likely pretty helpful when looking just for the high-effort research. My main negative was the information density decrease on the grants page, a page for a few years of my life I used to check regularly. Comparing on iPad right now with the way back machine, I used to see 8 grants on a page, but now I only see 2, so a 4x reduction.
Took me a while to find where you got your 2x+y from, I see it’s visible if you highlight the cells in the sheet.
Here’s a sheet with the score as sorted by the top 1k people, which is what I was interested in seeing: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1VODS3-NrlBTnSMbGibhT4M2FpmfT-ojaPTEuuFIk9xc/edit?usp=sharing
Feedback: I tried and failed on my phone to read the voting results by the ranking of how people voted. I don’t know what weighting is used in the spreadsheet so the ordering feels monkeyed-with.
(Someone told me this comment read as hostile to them; FYI I thought it was a funny series of thoughts that I had, no hostility meant at all!)
I saw this title and assumed someone was making a public criticism of CEA.
Then I saw it was written by a present CEA staff member.
And I thought “Wow, creative way to get changes made at your organization.” :D
If I were Thomas Kwa right now I would be offering Eneasz $10,000 for 5% of his impact certificate for making the HPMOR podcast.
Ah, this is the true meta trap for EAs.
Woop, thank you for true but contrary datapoints.
I had three on my first day and then was emotionally done. I remember thinking “to all other people, I can either cry with joy at what you say, or cry in frustration, but no other responses are available right now”.
It involved (for me) gearing up a ton of context and interest in one person, finding something critical to say with them, and then they were gone and it was happening again.
I mean, maybe we were all just being dumb and should handle it better. I also wonder if there’s some natural way for event organizers to be like “there are set break periods where we stop 1-1s from being booked” or something, though probably that’s a bad solution and there’s a better one.
After the mixup with CLR and CLTR, I can’t believe there are also now two CHAI’s that will sometimes be discussed on the EA Forum.
Yeah, pretty reasonable.
Well, you don’t have to be any more, because now it’s Jessica McCurdy’s reply.
To be clear I think this instance is a fairly okay request to make as a post title, but I don’t want the reasoning to imply anyone can do this for whatever reason they like.
Forgive the clickbait title, but EA is as prone to clickbait as anywhere else.
I mean, sometimes you have reason to make titles into a simple demand, but I wish there were a less weaksauce justification than “because our standards here are no better than anywhere else”.
I remember hearing that the money was just for the person and I felt alarmed, thinking that so many random people in my year at school would’ve worked their asses off to get $50k — it’s more than my household earned in a year.
Sydney told me scholarships like this are much more common in the US, then I updated that it’s only to be paid against college fees which is way more reasonable. But I guess this is kind of ambiguous still? Does seem like it’s two radically different products.
It’s nice to see this again <3
I asked Parfit to give this talk at that EAGxOxford, a conference Jacob Lagerros and I were the lead organizers of [edit: I see James Aung posted this, who was on the team too!]. It was one of the last talks of his life. I remember writing him an email about what talk to give, and he wrote a very long word document back as an attachment. He was a very careful thinker.
Also I remember a pretty endearing interaction between him and Anders Sandberg, where Anders pretended to be a fan and got Parfit to sign a copy of his book. (It was a joke because Anders and Parfit were former roommates and good friends.)