Ian Turner

Karma: 961

Ian Turner Mar 19, 2025, 3:31 AM
3 points
0 ∶ 0
in reply to: tlevin’s comment on: levin’s Quick takes
Another one you missed is that the world is getting better over time, so we should expect donation opportunities in the future to be worse.

Ian Turner’s Quick takes

Ian TurnerMar 18, 2025, 2:02 PM

5 points

2 comments1 min readEA link

Ian Turner Mar 18, 2025, 2:02 PM
9 points
1 ∶ 0
on: Ian Turner’s Quick takes
Random thought: does the idea of explosive takeoff of intelligence assume the alignment is solvable?

If the alignment problem isn’t solvable, then an AGI, in creating ASI, would face the same dilemma as humans: The ASI wouldn’t necessarily have the same goals, would disempower the AGI, instrumental convergence, all the usual stuff.

I suppose one counter argument is that the AGI rationally shoudn’t create ASI, for these reasons, but, similar to humans, might do so anyway due to competitive/racing dynamics. Whichever AGI doesn’t creates ASI will be left behind, etc.

Ian Turner Mar 17, 2025, 5:52 PM
3 points
0 ∶ 0
on: Read More News
I think the amount of news that is helpful and healthy to consume depends a lot on what it is that you’re trying to do. So maybe good place to start is thinking about how sensitive your work is to developments, and go from there. Channel Duncan Sabien and ask, “what am I doing, and why am I doing it?”.

And if you are going to spend a lot of time with the news, read Zvi’s piece on bounded distrust and maybe also the linked piece from Scott Alexander.

Ian Turner Mar 11, 2025, 8:10 PM
18 points
7 ∶ 0
on: Giving more has made me less generous
Personally, I view participation in the charitable projects in my community (including donating to church or to a colleague’s pledge drive) as part of my consumption basket and totally unrelated to altruistic work. Relationships are incredibly important to one’s life satisfaction and participating in the community is a part of that.

Ian Turner Mar 11, 2025, 7:56 PM
4 points
1 ∶ 0
in reply to: gogreatergood’s comment on: History of diversity efforts and trends in EA
I did not click Disagree; but I will say that I’m not sure I agree that “The people we are aiming to help should be well within the conversation”. I don’t mean to say that we should ignore their perspectives, values, or opinions, but I don’t think having them attend EA Global is a useful way to achieve that. I’ve had a lot of interesting conversation with GiveDirectly and AMF beneficiaries, but I also think that the median beneficiary would not have much to contribute at EA Global, and if you choose exceptional beneficiaries to represent the class of beneficiaries as a whole, that leads to a different set of problems.

Ian Turner Feb 10, 2025, 6:04 PM
1 point
0 ∶ 0
in reply to: Wyatt S.’s comment on: Implications of USAID freeze on donations
EA is funding some of that stuff, e.g., The Center for Election Science.

Ian Turner Feb 10, 2025, 6:03 PM
1 point
1 ∶ 0
in reply to: david_reinstein’s comment on: Implications of USAID freeze on donations
It’s not even clear to me that EA trying to change the election would be positive EV. Look at what’s happened with AI.

Ian Turner Feb 6, 2025, 11:02 PM
3 points
0 ∶ 0
on: Why misaligned AGI won’t lead to mass killings (and what actually matters instead)
I would suggest thinking about it this way: Do I need to know what Gary Kasparov’s winning move would be, in order to know that he would beat me at chess? The answer is “no”, he would definitely win, even if I can’t predict exactly how.
As I wrote a couple of years ago, are you able to use your imagination to think of ways that a well-resourced and motivated group of humans could cause human extinction? If so, is there a reason to think that an AI wouldn’t be able to execute the same plan?

Ian Turner Feb 6, 2025, 12:13 AM
2 points
0 ∶ 0
in reply to: Fernando Irarrázaval 🔸’s comment on: What posts are you thinking about writing?
I would welcome a blog post about RCTs, and if you decide to write one, I hope you consider the perspective below.

As far as I can tell ~0% of nonprofits are interested in rigorously studying their programs in any way, RCTs or otherwise, and I can’t help but suspect that this is largely because mostly when we do run RCTs we find that these cherished programs have ~no effect. It’s not at all surprising to me that most charities that conduct RCTs feel pressured to do so by donors; but on the other hand basically all charity activities ultimately flow from donor preferences, because donors are the ones with most of the power.

Living Goods is one interesting example, where they ran an RCT because a donor demanded it, got an unexpected (positive) result, and basically pivoted the whole charity based on that. I view that as a success story.

I am certainly not claiming that RCTs are appropriate for all kinds of programs, or some kind of silver bullet. It’s more like, if you ask charities “would you like more or less accountability for results”, the answer is almost always going to be, “less, thanks”.

Ian Turner Feb 5, 2025, 10:41 PM
4 points
1 ∶ 0
in reply to: Matthew_Barnett’s comment on: Gradual Disempowerment: Systemic Existential Risks from Incremental AI Development
I don’t understand how you think these legal mechanisms would actually serve to bind superintelligent AIs. Or to put it another way, could chimpanzees or dolphins have established a legal mechanism that would have prevented human incursion into their habitat? If not, how is this hypothetical situation different?

Regarding the idea of trade — doesn’t this basically assume that humans will get a return on capital that is at least as good as the AIs’ return on capital? If not, wouldn’t the AIs eventually end up owning all the capital? And wouldn’t we expect superintelligent AIs to be better than humans at managing capital?

Ian Turner Feb 4, 2025, 4:18 PM
12 points
8 ∶ 0
in reply to: Yelnats T.J.’s comment on: Implications of USAID freeze on donations
I agree that it aged well in terms of the expected effects of certain electoral outcomes, but the way I see it, that is different from claiming that electoral interventions would be cost-effective (even in retrospect). There was so much money and effort put into the election, it’s not at all clear to me that EA would have been able to make a difference, even with the full weight of the movement dedicated to it.

Ian Turner Feb 3, 2025, 12:50 AM
10 points
1 ∶ 0
in reply to: WillieG’s comment on: If EAs existed 100 years ago, would they support Prohibition?
Side note, I’m coming around to the idea the Prohibition isn’t actually a failed policy (except in the sense that it was overturned), because the decrease in domestic violence actually exceeded the amount of violence perpetrated by bootleggers. But from a democratic policymaking perspective, the legibility of the violence matters.

Here’s an essay from Vox making this case.

Ian Turner Jan 30, 2025, 10:23 PM
4 points
0 ∶ 0
in reply to: Matthew_Barnett’s comment on: Gradual Disempowerment: Systemic Existential Risks from Incremental AI Development

there is ample opportunity for peaceful and mutually beneficial trade with AIs that do not share our utility functions

What would humans have to offer AIs for trade in this scenario, where there are “more competitive machine alternatives to humans in almost all societal functions”?

as long as this is done peacefully and lawfully

What do these words even mean in an ASI context? If humans are relatively disempowered, this would also presumably extend to the use of force and legal contexts.

Ian Turner Jan 28, 2025, 5:42 PM
5 points
1 ∶ 0
in reply to: Arturo Macias’s comment on: The anti-AIDS program PEPFAR: the European Union must replace the United States (if necessary)
The use of the word “shall” makes it sound like you are confidently predicting the EU will do it, as opposed to to proposing asking the EU to do it.

Ian Turner Jan 21, 2025, 10:27 PM
7 points
2 ∶ 0
on: Should EAs help employees in the developing world move to the West?
This question was also discussed in this other forum post, and probably in some other posts that I can’t find. Why Brain Drain Isn’t Something We Should Worry About

Open Philanthropy: Economic Growth in Low- and Middle-Income Countries

Ian TurnerJan 19, 2025, 1:07 PM

20 points

1 comment1 min readEA link

(www.openphilanthropy.org)

Ian Turner Jan 14, 2025, 6:55 PM
6 points
2 ∶ 0
on: Are AI safetyists crying wolf?
I feel like @Zvi put it well when he wrote,
I don’t see any wolves. So why are you proposing to have a boy watch the sheep and yell ‘wolf’ if a wolf shows up? Stop crying wolf.

Ian Turner Jan 14, 2025, 6:50 PM
10 points
5 ∶ 0
on: The ugly sides of two approaches to charity
Thanks Julia for writing this. It’s correct all the way around.

I can’t help but feel though that there is something a little mean-spirited in targeting those donating to Notre Dame, the opera, etc. There is a common and (in my opinion) somewhat toxic pattern where if someone spends their money on yachts, mansions, etc., then nobody complains but as soon as they do something even a little bit public spirited then all of a sudden everyone feels free to criticize. Like, we can have plenty of objections to MacKenzie Scott’s philanthropic choices, but shouldn’t Jeff Bezos get at least as much commentary for his non-philanthropic choices?

Ian Turner Jan 5, 2025, 4:46 PM
5 points
0 ∶ 0
in reply to: SofiiaF’s comment on: SofiiaF’s Quick takes
What is an HEA?

Ian Turner

Ian Turner’s Quick takes

Open Philan­thropy: Eco­nomic Growth in Low- and Mid­dle-In­come Countries

Open Philanthropy: Economic Growth in Low- and Middle-Income Countries