constructive

• constructive 5 Jan 2024 10:29 UTC

  1 point

  0 ∶ 0

  in reply to: tlevin’s comment on: EU poli­cy­mak­ers reach an agree­ment on the AI Act

  And your update is that this process will be more globally impactful than you initially expected? Would be curious to learn why.

• constructive 31 Dec 2023 9:05 UTC

  1 point

  0 ∶ 0

  on: EU poli­cy­mak­ers reach an agree­ment on the AI Act

  At the very least, in my view, the picture has changed in an EU-favoring direction in the last year (despite lots of progress in US AI policy), and this should prompt a re-evaluation of the conventional wisdom (in my understanding) that the US has enough leverage over AI development such that policy careers in DC are more impactful even for Europeans.

  Interesting! I don’t quite understand what updated you. To me, it looks like, given the EU AI Act is mostly determined at this stage, there is less leverage in the EU, not more. Meanwhile, the approach the US takes to AI regulation still remains uncertain, indicating many more opportunities for impact.

• constructive 22 Aug 2023 12:08 UTC

  1 point

  0 ∶ 0

  on: Col­lec­tion of work on ‘Should you should fo­cus on the EU if you’re in­ter­ested in AI gov­er­nance for longter­mist/​x-risk rea­sons?’

  Thanks for the collection! (Note there is a typo in the title “Should you should focus on the EU if you’re interested in AI governance for longtermist/​x-risk reasons?’”)

• constructive 18 Jun 2023 9:49 UTC

  2 points

  0 ∶ 0

  in reply to: pcihon’s comment on: A sum­mary of cur­rent work in AI governance

  Thanks for contributing these examples! Added a link to your comment in the main text.

A sum­mary of cur­rent work in AI governance

• constructive 26 Apr 2023 9:22 UTC

  2 points

  0 ∶ 0

  on: [Cause Ex­plo­ra­tion Prizes] NOT Get­ting Ab­solutely Hosed by a So­lar Flare

  Thanks for the hint. Skimming this, it sounds somewhat exaggerated. I’d like to see a more rigorous investigation. (I.e., how strong can flares get, which equipment would be damaged.) This article suggests flares are much less harmful (only read first few paragraphs)

• constructive 28 Mar 2023 7:49 UTC

  5 points

  1 ∶ 0

  in reply to: MaxRa’s comment on: The Prospect of an AI Winter

  (Uncertain) My guess would be that a global conflict would increase AI investment considerably, as (I think) R&D typically increases in war times. And AI may turn out to be particularly strategically relevant.

• constructive 24 Mar 2023 19:14 UTC

  3 points

  0 ∶ 0

  in reply to: sapphire’s comment on: Coun­ter­pro­duc­tive Altru­ism: The Other Heavy Tail

  Though you need to consider the counterfactual where the talent currently at OAI, DM, and Anthropic all work at Google or Meta and have way less of a safety culture.

• constructive 25 Feb 2023 21:38 UTC

  2 points

  0 ∶ 0

  in reply to: Felix Wolf’s comment on: Open Thread: Jan­uary — March 2023

  I think a central idea here is that superintelligence could innovate and thus find more energy-efficient means of running itself. We already see a trend of language models with the same capabilities getting more energy efficient over time through algorithmic improvement and better parameters/​data ratios. So even if the first Superintelligence requires a lot of energy, the systems developed in the period after it will probably need much less.

• constructive 18 Jan 2023 7:26 UTC

  2 points

  2 ∶ 0

  in reply to: Patrick Gruban’s comment on: EA Ger­many’s Strat­egy for 2023

  That sounds very sensible

• constructive 17 Jan 2023 20:24 UTC

  7 points

  3 ∶ 0

  in reply to: Patrick Gruban’s comment on: EA Ger­many’s Strat­egy for 2023

  Weakly held opinion that you could be investing too much into this progress. I’d expect to hit diminishing returns after ~50-100 hours (though have no expertise whatsoever)

• constructive 17 Jan 2023 20:22 UTC

  2 points

  1 ∶ 0

  in reply to: Sarah Tegeler’s comment on: EA Ger­many’s Strat­egy for 2023

  Sounds good! Thanks for the reply.
  I think I would additionally find it helpful to get some insights into what you are prioritizing to give feedback on project plans (or maybe your future post on impact metrics will include that?) - but I know communication takes a lot of effort, so it may be easier to just receive that feedback as you’re rolling out the projects. Looking forward to your next post

• constructive 17 Jan 2023 20:16 UTC

  1 point

  0 ∶ 0

  in reply to: She's done it ’s comment on: Some in­tu­itions about fel­low­ship programs

  Thanks!
  I think even for community building, there is a rather broad category, though most of the ones I know of are online, so they probably don’t apply here. It would be helpful to have some examples.

• constructive 17 Jan 2023 13:58 UTC

  15 points

  7 ∶ 0

  on: EA Ger­many’s Strat­egy for 2023

  Thanks for writing this!
  

  Your high-level strategy sounds great but is also fairly generic, so hard to criticize. One theme throughout seems to be an emphasis on creating solid structures and making sure everything is legally backed. I think this is important-especially after the FTX crisis-though I sense a risk of an overemphasis on security. EA Germany is yet a small community and has so much room to grow! I think we need a large number of capable people to solve some serious problems fairly soon. EA Germany should thus emphasize ambition and growth, primarily through targeted outreach and connecting the community better internationally.
  
  I was hoping to learn more about the concrete projects that you are working on/​ about to start. Here are some ideas that I see as priorities (Most are already happening to some degree):

  • Further growing Berlin as a hub, with the goal of making it attractive for people working full-time on EA causes. (E.g., organizing speaker events, creating housing for temporary stays, attracting talent)

  • Connecting the German community better internationally: Inviting leading EAs to give talks in major German cities and encouraging Germans to attend international events. (I think one reason German EAs seem to be less ambitious than EAs from other countries is that they aren’t connected well to senior EAs and thus receive less mentorship and worse access to opportunities)

  • Targeted outreach, particularly at national student fellowships such as Studienstiftung

  • Creating pipelines for talent, e.g., by running AI alignment camps or local iterations of the AGISF

  Thanks for all the work you are already doing! It’s always easy to suggest a lot of projects without having to start them myself :D

  Looking forward to your strategy playing out.
  

• constructive 17 Jan 2023 12:13 UTC

  3 points

  0 ∶ 0

  on: Some in­tu­itions about fel­low­ship programs

  Just for context—which programs are you referring to and have organized/​ participated in? I see the term “fellowship” used for a range of programs

• constructive 8 Dec 2022 16:59 UTC

  1 point

  0 ∶ 0

  in reply to: constructive’s comment on: Have your timelines changed as a re­sult of ChatGPT?

  I think my skepticism comes from the fact that you could already easily cheat on my biology exams with internet access (and people did when they were online during covid). This isn’t much of a problem with pen & paper exams, but it seems that online degrees will really struggle now.

• constructive 8 Dec 2022 16:57 UTC

  1 point

  0 ∶ 0

  in reply to: Geoffrey Miller’s comment on: Have your timelines changed as a re­sult of ChatGPT?

  Thank you. I think for the first two I still don’t see a big jump from just internet access. But I agree that cheating got a lot easier. The third example seems particularly like outsourcing an important skill.

• constructive 5 Dec 2022 19:20 UTC

  5 points

  3 ∶ 5

  in reply to: Geoffrey Miller’s comment on: Have your timelines changed as a re­sult of ChatGPT?

  This sounds a bit exaggerated. I haven’t engaged much with ChatGPT, but it seems like the same arguments could be made for students having access to the internet.
  Can you define what kind of writing assignments you are referring to?

• constructive 15 Nov 2022 13:49 UTC

  1 point

  0 ∶ 0

  in reply to: constructive’s comment on: Who wants to be hired? (May-Septem­ber 2022)

  [redacted]

Ac­countabil­ity Bud­dies: Why you might want one (+ Database to find one!)