Arthur Conmy

5Joined Jul 2021


Answer by Arthur ConmyMar 07, 202350

Wei Dai asserts that OpenAI make employee sign non-disparagement agreements here

Answer by Arthur ConmyNov 25, 202210

For capabilities things, is pretty good (though some things the author is very excited about I find underwhelming).

EDIT: weekly quick summaries of papers

There are some recent posts, for example this one that are just the intro and outro (22 seconds long) and miss the main post. Would be great if this bug could be fixed.

Answer by Arthur ConmySep 21, 202221

What were/are your basic and relevant questions? What were AIS folks missing?

I liked this post because of I've been thinking about similar issues recently, but find some of the conclusions strange. For example, isn't there a "generalised trolley problem" for any deontologist who asserts that rule X should be followed:

Aha! So you follow rule X? Well what if I told you that person over there will violate rule X twice unless you break rule X in the next 5 minutes?


Why is this relevant? I don't think at this point the deontologist holds up their hands upon hearing any example of the above and denounces their theory. I think they add another rule that allows them to violate their former rule*. I think more needs to be done to prove that the boundary cases for utilitarianism are wild, but they are not  out of the ordinary for deontological ethics.

* and I see this as about as wild as when the utilitarian doesn't voluntarily harvest organs because of "societal factors", and has to add this  to their utility function (here:

This is great and you should make a LW post; these are in a really nice format for shunting around. 

As a small nit: any idea why the first few essays of the Codex ( are not here?