Hide table of contents

We are thrilled to share that the NYU Mind, Ethics, and Policy (MEP) Program has now launched!

MEP will conduct and support foundational research about the nature and intrinsic value of nonhuman minds, including biological and artificial minds. In particular, this program aims to advance understanding of the consciousness, sentience, sapience, moral status, legal status, and political status of nonhumans – with special focus on invertebrates and AIs – via research and outreach. The team will include Jeff Sebo as director, me (Sofia) as coordinator, and Ned Block, Samuel Bowman, David Chalmers, Becca Franks, Joshua Lewis, S. Matthew Liao, Claudia Passos-Ferreira, Luke Roelofs, Katrina Wyman, and others as faculty affiliates.

MEP has a variety of projects underway; you can find information about two of them below.

David Chalmers Public Talk

On October 13 2022 at 5:00pm ET, MEP will host a public talk by David Chalmers (University Professor of Philosophy and Neural Science and Co-Director of the Center for Mind, Brain, and Consciousness, NYU; author, The Conscious MindConstructing the World, and Reality+: Virtual Worlds and the Problems of Philosophy) on whether large language models are sentient. This talk, which will be co-sponsored by the NYU Center for Bioethics, the NYU Center for Mind, Brain, and Consciousness, and the NYU Minds, Brains, and Machines Initiative, will be free and open to the public, in person and online. You can register to attend here.

Early-Career Award and Workshop

MEP is announcing an Early-Career Award and Workshop on Animal and AI Consciousness. PhD students and early-career faculty (PhD 2017 or later) in any field are invited to submit current or recent (published 2021 or later) work on this topic. Selected authors will receive a $500 award and an all-expenses paid trip to the Association of Scientific Studies of Consciousness Conference at NYU in June 2023. They will also be invited to speak at a Workshop on Animal and AI Consciousness associated with this conference. You can find more information about this award and workshop, including how to submit, here.

Finally, if you have interest in receiving updates from MEP, you can visit our website or sign up for our email list.

If you have interest in participating in our work, please contact Jeff or me to discuss.

Comments4


Sorted by Click to highlight new comments since:

Very exciting project, congratulations

Congratulations!

Question: "special focus on invertebrates and AIs " I wonder how much of the focus will be shared by invertebrates, how much by AI?

Thanks Fai! Our year one goals include producing a research agenda and set of research priorities, so we still have an open mind about the details here. But generally speaking, I expect that our early research will focus on foundational questions that matter for both populations, and that insofar as we prioritize between them, our early research will prioritize AIs. (With that said, MEP is one of two new programs that we plan to launch this year, and the other one is more on the animal side. That one will be announced next week, so stay tuned for that!)

Here's the announcement about the new WAW program that Jeff mentioned was forthcoming in his comment reply!

https://twitter.com/jeffrsebo/status/1575095506832719872

Curated and popular this week
 ·  · 5m read
 · 
This work has come out of my Undergraduate dissertation. I haven't shared or discussed these results much before putting this up.  Message me if you'd like the code :) Edit: 16th April. After helpful comments, especially from Geoffrey, I now believe this method only identifies shifts in the happiness scale (not stretches). Have edited to make this clearer. TLDR * Life satisfaction (LS) appears flat over time, despite massive economic growth — the “Easterlin Paradox.” * Some argue that happiness is rising, but we’re reporting it more conservatively — a phenomenon called rescaling. * I test rescaling using long-run German panel data, looking at whether the association between reported happiness and three “get-me-out-of-here” actions (divorce, job resignation, and hospitalisation) changes over time. * If people are getting happier (and rescaling is occuring) the probability of these actions should become less linked to reported LS — but they don’t. * I find little evidence of rescaling. We should probably take self-reported happiness scores at face value. 1. Background: The Happiness Paradox Humans today live longer, richer, and healthier lives in history — yet we seem no seem for it. Self-reported life satisfaction (LS), usually measured on a 0–10 scale, has remained remarkably flatover the last few decades, even in countries like Germany, the UK, China, and India that have experienced huge GDP growth. As Michael Plant has written, the empirical evidence for this is fairly strong. This is the Easterlin Paradox. It is a paradox, because at a point in time, income is strongly linked to happiness, as I've written on the forum before. This should feel uncomfortable for anyone who believes that economic progress should make lives better — including (me) and others in the EA/Progress Studies worlds. Assuming agree on the empirical facts (i.e., self-reported happiness isn't increasing), there are a few potential explanations: * Hedonic adaptation: as life gets
 ·  · 38m read
 · 
In recent months, the CEOs of leading AI companies have grown increasingly confident about rapid progress: * OpenAI's Sam Altman: Shifted from saying in November "the rate of progress continues" to declaring in January "we are now confident we know how to build AGI" * Anthropic's Dario Amodei: Stated in January "I'm more confident than I've ever been that we're close to powerful capabilities... in the next 2-3 years" * Google DeepMind's Demis Hassabis: Changed from "as soon as 10 years" in autumn to "probably three to five years away" by January. What explains the shift? Is it just hype? Or could we really have Artificial General Intelligence (AGI)[1] by 2028? In this article, I look at what's driven recent progress, estimate how far those drivers can continue, and explain why they're likely to continue for at least four more years. In particular, while in 2024 progress in LLM chatbots seemed to slow, a new approach started to work: teaching the models to reason using reinforcement learning. In just a year, this let them surpass human PhDs at answering difficult scientific reasoning questions, and achieve expert-level performance on one-hour coding tasks. We don't know how capable AGI will become, but extrapolating the recent rate of progress suggests that, by 2028, we could reach AI models with beyond-human reasoning abilities, expert-level knowledge in every domain, and that can autonomously complete multi-week projects, and progress would likely continue from there.  On this set of software engineering & computer use tasks, in 2020 AI was only able to do tasks that would typically take a human expert a couple of seconds. By 2024, that had risen to almost an hour. If the trend continues, by 2028 it'll reach several weeks.  No longer mere chatbots, these 'agent' models might soon satisfy many people's definitions of AGI — roughly, AI systems that match human performance at most knowledge work (see definition in footnote). This means that, while the compa
 ·  · 4m read
 · 
SUMMARY:  ALLFED is launching an emergency appeal on the EA Forum due to a serious funding shortfall. Without new support, ALLFED will be forced to cut half our budget in the coming months, drastically reducing our capacity to help build global food system resilience for catastrophic scenarios like nuclear winter, a severe pandemic, or infrastructure breakdown. ALLFED is seeking $800,000 over the course of 2025 to sustain its team, continue policy-relevant research, and move forward with pilot projects that could save lives in a catastrophe. As funding priorities shift toward AI safety, we believe resilient food solutions remain a highly cost-effective way to protect the future. If you’re able to support or share this appeal, please visit allfed.info/donate. Donate to ALLFED FULL ARTICLE: I (David Denkenberger) am writing alongside two of my team-mates, as ALLFED’s co-founder, to ask for your support. This is the first time in Alliance to Feed the Earth in Disaster’s (ALLFED’s) 8 year existence that we have reached out on the EA Forum with a direct funding appeal outside of Marginal Funding Week/our annual updates. I am doing so because ALLFED’s funding situation is serious, and because so much of ALLFED’s progress to date has been made possible through the support, feedback, and collaboration of the EA community.  Read our funding appeal At ALLFED, we are deeply grateful to all our supporters, including the Survival and Flourishing Fund, which has provided the majority of our funding for years. At the end of 2024, we learned we would be receiving far less support than expected due to a shift in SFF’s strategic priorities toward AI safety. Without additional funding, ALLFED will need to shrink. I believe the marginal cost effectiveness for improving the future and saving lives of resilience is competitive with AI Safety, even if timelines are short, because of potential AI-induced catastrophes. That is why we are asking people to donate to this emergency appeal