TL;DR: An EAG 2022 retrospective, but also a creative writing exercise.
 

I’ve been thinking a lot about the past and the future lately. And in particular about my values. In this… thing, I try to articulate something hard to articulate; my admiration for the great big everything and my strong desire to keep it going. I hope it’s not too confusing and I don’t blame you for skipping this one.


"The way they are spending, a split appears inevitable. It's egregious. I get the argument that it makes sense to focus on scalability, but my heart aches when I hear these stories."


elsewhere, some time ago.

“At some point, the waves pulled me out further, prphff, and I swear I almost didn't make it back." he was swaying as he said it. Alcohol and exhaustion from the night swim had taken their toll. I mumbled something, but he ignored it and just took a step closer to me and held my head with both of his hands. Then he rested his forehead against mine. He was the kind of person who felt comfortable doing that.

"You're a good friend, a very good friend; you know that. I only want the best for you. So when I say this, know that I only say it to help. - When you sing, you're singing too loud. You're drowning everybody out; it's no fun. You need to..." he trailed off, losing track of the thought. I helped him back up the stairs leading up to the hostel, where he collapsed into his bed to sleep and sweat out the expensive leftover wine he had consumed at the end of his shift.


Two weekends ago I flew out to London to meet some friends and to think. I've been at one of these events before, and it's always rather intense. Being surrounded by brilliant minds buzzing with the urge to do something certainly has the potential to blow a fuse or two.

But these days, I am not in a competitive mood most of the time. I marvel and absorb whatever comes my way. Indeed, my best conversations didn't happen with any single person - they were a potpourri of ideas and opinions, picked up and spread from person to person, amplified and refined at each step.


Some fortuitous turn of fate put me at the table with the artsy, cool kids that I had admired from a distance for a long time. I remember decorating my stationery with Stanley Kubrick and Jimmy Hendrix cutouts, their feral expressions matching my feral moods. But my feral moods only ever showed on my inside; I was a shy kid, after all.

It took months or perhaps a year until they invited me to one of their hangouts. Naturally, it was a total disaster. Rather than being introduced into a world of constant excitement and wonder, we were just a handful of kids sitting around a table, not knowing what to say to each other. We all want the same things, don't we.


"So what is your current take on... everything?" I ask, not wasting any time.

"Everything everything?"

"Well, perhaps mostly the funding influx and what is happening to the community."

"It's complicated. This influx is, of course, exactly what we dreamed of in the beginning. But it's also a lot to process, and things are moving very fast. And if you care about helping people right now, it's hard to accept some of the things that are happening. $4000 can save a life, you know. On average."

"..."

"And I don't want to argue against longtermism. I can do the EV calculation as well as you can. I'm just saying that the contrast is getting rather grotesque. I'm not sure all of this can still be called one unified thing."

“But that’s kind of … sad?”

“I agree, it doesn’t feel right. There is a core somewhere that ties everything and everyone together, but I can’t put my finger on it. Something that differentiates an EA from a random futurist/transhumanist/extropian. Any ideas?”


"And then, I think, the numbers would just have to wrap around. That just somehow feels right."

It is past midnight, and the bonfire is dying down. My high school physics teacher gives me an odd look that is mirrored in the faces of my classmates. My exposition on why I think that +∞ = -∞ had been hurried, lacking pace and grace. (And logic, I admit.)

"You might enjoy reading about Gödel's incompleteness theorem. He demonstrates that there are true statements that we can never prove." my physics teacher opines to break the silence. 

I raise my eyebrows, making my forehead all wrinkly, in no small part due to my disbelief. Even then, I realized that this is not a manifestation of magic in our world. I knew there had to be a catch. But I also knew I had to know what it was.


Night crept upon us, and then the event was over. I heard about the parties, which are not an official part of the event but still are a highlight for many. I feel torn. I rarely desire to drag things out, borrow a bit of time from my future self, and cling to the present. This night I feel a little bit of that desire. But I also feel the gravitational pull of the bed in my AirBnB, and I know how parties are for me. They don't work from a cost-benefit perspective.

I walk home alone. Ah no, with two friends. They are talking about the Sahara desert and how you can repurpose an old fire engine to travel through the desert. In fact, you can fit an entire family into that thing and just go from village to village. And you'll have all eyes on you when you arrive; what a ridiculous(ly awesome) scene. 

I yawn. The fire engine story doesn’t move me. Even the excitement of my friends does not manage to jump over. I used to be very worried about that; why don't I like what other people like? But the angst has been in retrograde for a long while now, and I've learned to like myself[1]. And it's even more than that. I've learned to like everyone else, too, even if they talk about fire engines. Especially when they talk about fire engines.

I draw energy from that thought. This is what humanity is. It's driving a fire engine through the desert and rejoicing. It's partying through the night, bonfires, night swims, friendship, art, and awkwardness. It's climbing into a random van and going on adventures. It sits at the core of everything.

I don't tend to do those things myself too much. I love numbers and thinking about the future. I am restless. And I am fine. Caring about numbers is humanity, too, you know. We might be somewhat different, you and I, but in the end, we all want the same things.

  1. ^

    Most of the time.

Comments1


Sorted by Click to highlight new comments since:

Thank you for the snippets. 

EAG was, by the end, very emotional for me. I found some of my personal failures being juxtaposed with some of my civilization's failings. I was put in very direct touch with the yearning at my core. I talked with people who I like and respect and feel wary around. Some of them are spooked and worried about the shape of things to come. I felt my own anxieties about my place in the world and my value rear up. It was fun and challenging and exhausting. 

Curated and popular this week
 ·  · 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
 ·  · 1m read
 · 
We’ve written a new report on the threat of AI-enabled coups.  I think this is a very serious risk – comparable in importance to AI takeover but much more neglected.  In fact, AI-enabled coups and AI takeover have pretty similar threat models. To see this, here’s a very basic threat model for AI takeover: 1. Humanity develops superhuman AI 2. Superhuman AI is misaligned and power-seeking 3. Superhuman AI seizes power for itself And now here’s a closely analogous threat model for AI-enabled coups: 1. Humanity develops superhuman AI 2. Superhuman AI is controlled by a small group 3. Superhuman AI seizes power for the small group While the report focuses on the risk that someone seizes power over a country, I think that similar dynamics could allow someone to take over the world. In fact, if someone wanted to take over the world, their best strategy might well be to first stage an AI-enabled coup in the United States (or whichever country leads on superhuman AI), and then go from there to world domination. A single person taking over the world would be really bad. I’ve previously argued that it might even be worse than AI takeover. [1] The concrete threat models for AI-enabled coups that we discuss largely translate like-for-like over to the risk of AI takeover.[2] Similarly, there’s a lot of overlap in the mitigations that help with AI-enabled coups and AI takeover risk — e.g. alignment audits to ensure no human has made AI secretly loyal to them, transparency about AI capabilities, monitoring AI activities for suspicious behaviour, and infosecurity to prevent insiders from tampering with training.  If the world won't slow down AI development based on AI takeover risk (e.g. because there’s isn’t strong evidence for misalignment), then advocating for a slow down based on the risk of AI-enabled coups might be more convincing and achieve many of the same goals.  I really want to encourage readers — especially those at labs or governments — to do something