All of jacquesthibs's Comments + Replies

I shared the following as a bio for EAG Bay Area 2024. I'm sharing this here if it reaches someone who wants to chat or collaborate.

Hey! I'm Jacques. I'm an independent technical alignment researcher with a background in physics and experience in government (social innovation, strategic foresight, mental health and energy regulation). Link to Swapcard profile. Twitter/X.

CURRENT WORK

  • Collaborating with Quintin Pope on our Supervising AIs Improving AIs agenda (making automated AI science safe and controllable). The current project involves a new method allowi
... (read more)

Another data point: I got my start in alignment through the AISC. I had just left my job, so I spent 4 months skilling up and working hard on my AISC project. I started hanging out on EleutherAI because my mentors spent a lot of time there. This led me to do AGISF in parallel.

After those 4 months, I attended MATS 2.0 and 2.1. I've been doing independent research for ~1 year and have about 8.5 more months of funding left.

1
Remmelt
3mo
I did not know this. Thank you for sharing all the details! It's interesting to read about the paths you went through:  AISC --> EleutherAI --> AGISF              --> MATS 2.0 and 2.1               --> Independent research grant I'll add it as an individual anecdote to our sheet.

More information about the alleged manipulative behaviour of Sam Altman

Source

Update, board members seem to be holding their ground more than expected in this tight situation:

My current speculation as to what is happening at OpenAI

How do we know this wasn't their best opportunity to strike if Sam was indeed not being totally honest with the board?

Let's say the rumours are true, that Sam is building out external orgs (NVIDIA competitor and iPhone-like competitor) to escape the power of the board and potentially go against the charter. Would this 'conflict of interest' be enough? If you take that story forward, it sounds more and more like he was setting up AGI to be run by external companies, using OpenAI as a fundraising bargai... (read more)

2
jacquesthibs
5mo
Update, board members seem to be holding their ground more than expected in this tight situation:

Quillette founder seems to be planning to write an article regarding EA's impact on on tech:

"If anyone with insider knowledge wants to write about the impact of Effective Altruism in the technology industry please get in touch with me claire@quillette.com. We pay our writers and can protect authors' anonymity if desired."

It would probably be impactful if someone in the know provided a counterbalance to whoever will undoubtedly email her to disparage EA with half-truths/lies.

To share another perspective: As an independent alignment researcher, I also feel really conflicted. I could be making several multiples of my salary if my focus was to get a role on an alignment team at an AGI lab. My other option would be building startups trying to hit it big and providing more funding to what I think is needed.

Like, I could say, "well, I'm already working directly on something and taking a big pay-cut so I shouldn't need to donate close to 10%", but something about that doesn't feel right... But then to counter-balance that, I'm constantly worried that I just won't get funding anymore at some point and would be in need of money to pay for expenses during a transition.

4
calebp
5mo
Fwiw my personal take (and this is not in my capacity as a grantmaker) is that building up your runway seems really important, and I personally think that it should be a higher priority than donating 10%. My guess is that GWWC would suggest dropping your commitment to say 2% as a temporary measure while you build up your savings.

I've also started working on a repo in order to make Community Notes more efficient by using LLMs.

Don't forget that we train language models on the internet! The more truthful your dataset is, the more truthful the models will be! Let's revamp the internet for truthfulness, and we'll subsequently improve truthfulness in our AI systems!!

I shared a tweet about it here: https://x.com/JacquesThibs/status/1724492016254341208?s=20

Consider liking and retweeting it if you think this is impactful. I'd like it to get into the hands of the right people.

If you work at a social media website or YouTube (or know anyone who does), please read the text below:

Community Notes is one of the best features to come out on social media apps in a long time. The code is even open source. Why haven't other social media websites picked it up yet? If they care about truth, this would be a considerable step forward beyond. Notes like “this video is funded by x nation” or “this video talks about health info; go here to learn more” messages are simply not good enough.

If you work at companies like YouTube or know someone who... (read more)

2
jacquesthibs
5mo
I've also started working on a repo in order to make Community Notes more efficient by using LLMs.
5
Ian Turner
5mo
One may infer that they do not care about truth, at least not relative to other considerations.
2
jacquesthibs
5mo
Don't forget that we train language models on the internet! The more truthful your dataset is, the more truthful the models will be! Let's revamp the internet for truthfulness, and we'll subsequently improve truthfulness in our AI systems!!
2
jacquesthibs
5mo
I shared a tweet about it here: https://x.com/JacquesThibs/status/1724492016254341208?s=20 Consider liking and retweeting it if you think this is impactful. I'd like it to get into the hands of the right people.

Attempt to explain why I think AI systems are not the same thing as a library card when it comes to bio-risk.

To focus on less of an extreme example, I’ll be ignoring the case where AI can create new, more powerful pathogens faster than we can create defences, though I think this is an important case (some people just don’t find it plausible because it relies on the assumption that AIs being able to create new knowledge).

I think AI Safety people should make more of an effort to walkthrough the threat model so I’ll give an initial quick first try:

1) Library.... (read more)

I'm working on an ultimate doc on productivity I plan to share and make it easy, specifically for alignment researchers.

Let me know if you have any comments or suggestions as I work on it.

Roam Research link for easier time reading.

Google Docs link in case you want to leave comments there.

From what I understand, Amazon does not get a board seat for this investment. Figured that should be highlighted. Seems like Amazon just gets to use Anthropic’s models and maybe make back their investment later on. Am I understanding this correctly? 

As part of the investment, Amazon will take a minority stake in Anthropic. Our corporate governance structure remains unchanged, with the Long Term Benefit Trust continuing to guide Anthropic in accordance with our Responsible Scaling Policy. As outlined in this policy, we will conduct pre-deployment tests

... (read more)

I would, however, not downplay their talent density.

1
Zhijing Jin
7mo
Good idea! Just made the other post to reach more audience!

Thanks for sharing. I think the above are examples of things people often don't think of when trying new ways to be more productive. Instead, the default is trying out new productivity tools and systems (which might also help!). Environment and being in a flux period can totally change your behaviour in the long term; sometimes, it's the only way to create lasting change.

Answer by jacquesthibsSep 25, 202331
14
1
2

When I first was looking into being veg^n, I became irritated by the inflated reviews at veg^n restaurants. It didn’t take me long to apply a veg^n tax; I started to assume the restaurant’s food was 1 star below what their average was. Made me more distrustful of veg^ns too.

I think using virtue ethics is the right call here, just be truthful.

Is someone planning on doing an overview post of all the AI Pause discussion? I’m guessing some people would appreciate it if someone took the time to make an unbiased synthesis of the posts and discussions.

3
Will Aldred
7mo
According to the debate week announcement, Scott Alexander will be writing a summary/conclusion post.

Are you or any other EA lawyer still doing this?

Either way, I’m seeking advice to figure out how I can save money on taxes once I move to the UK (I’m from Canada) and receive funding for my independent AI Safety research. I’ll be going to the UK on a Youth Mobility visa. I’m wondering if it’s possible for me to setup something so that I can save tax on ‘business’ expenses (office space, laptop, monitor, etc.).

I’m happy to pay if someone can help with this (otherwise I will reach out to non-EA lawyers).

Would newer people find it valuable to have some kind of 80,000 hours career chatbot that had access to the career guide, podcast notes, EA forum posts, job postings, etc, and then answered career questions? I’m curious if it could be designed to be better than just a raw read of the career guide or at least a useful add-on to the career guide.

Potential features:

  • It could collect your conversation and convert most of it into an application for a (human) 1-on-1 meeting.
  • You could have a speech-to-text option to ramble all the things you’ve been thinking of.
  • ???

If anyone from 80k is reading this, I’d be happy to build this as a paid project.

Would be great to have someone who is exceptional at convincing high net worth individuals to donate for specific causes. I’m sure some people in the AI Safety community would find that valuable given the large funding gap despite the exceptional amount of attention the field is receiving. I’m sure other cause areas would also find it valuable.

EDIT: I’ve gotten a few disagree-votes, which is totally fine! Though, I’m curious why some people disagree. If it‘s because they wouldn’t find this interesting, they don’t think it would be appropriate for the podcast, or…?

Thanks for all your work, JJ! Good luck with whatever you end up doing next!

(Note in case anybody else wants to pick up where AISS left off: This is a bit unfortunate for me given that not having an org to sponsor work visas in the UK might affect my decision for moving to there. We had talked about AISS trying to do the work to get that setup in the next 1-2 years.)

I still have plans to setup a research org in the UK

In this framework, I propose that Xnder ³amoXnt of mone\ to donate ́ Ze bXndle
considerations relating to taxes, weakness of will and uncertainty as well as financial
investment.

One thing I think is missing from the "how much you should donate" section above is a discussion about what kind of job the person is doing. Should the percentage be the same for someone doing Earning to Give vs someone working on a direct cause area?

1
Denis
10mo
IMHO this is a very personal, case-by-case calculation.  A person will donate what they can rather than just a fixed percentage. But this can depend on many factors, not just jobs / income, but also expenditures (do they have kids? are they paying off college loans? a mortgage? ...) and potential risks (what if they lose their job? what if one of the kids gets sick? ...).  That said, I believe there is a huge opportunity to maximise the "what they can donate" with a more structured approach. Today we have a very simplistic all-or-nothing donation model. For every dollar or euro you have, you either donate it (and lose it forever) or you don't donate it at all. I believe there could also be a happy-medium, I've started a draft post on that ... 

I recently sent in some grant proposals to continue working on my independent alignment research. It gives an overview of what I'd like to work on for this next year (and more really). If you want to have a look at the full doc, send me a DM. If you'd like to help out through funding or contributing to the projects, please let me know.

Here's the summary introduction:

12-month salary for building a language model system for accelerating alignment research and upskilling (additional funding will be used to create an organization), and studying how to&nbs... (read more)

I gave talk about my Accelerating Alignment with LLMs agenda about 1 month ago (which is basically a decade in AI tools time). Part of the agenda covered (publicly) here.

I will maybe write an actual post about the agenda soon, but would love to have some people who are willing to look over it. If you are interested, send me a message. I am currently applying for grants and exploring the possibility of building an org focused on speeding up this agenda and avoid spreading myself too thin.

I agree with this post. I've been reading many more papers since first entering this field because I've been increasingly convinced of the value of treating alignment as an engineering problem and pulling insights from the literature. I've also been trying to do more thinking about how to update on the current paradigm from the classic Yud and Bostrom alignment arguments. In this respect, I applaud Quintin Pope for his work.

This week, I will send a grant proposal to continue my work in alignment. I'd be grateful if you could look at my proposal and provide... (read more)

So, things have blown up way more than I expected and things are chaotic. Still not sure what will happen or if a treaty is actually in the cards, but I’m beginning to see a path to tons of more investment in alignment potentially. One example why is that Jeff Bezos just followed Eliezer on Twitter and I think it may catch the attention of pretty powerful and rich people who want to see AI go well. We are so off-distribution, could go in any direction.

Wow, Bezos has indeed just followed Eliezer:

https://twitter.com/BigTechAlert/status/1641659849539833856

@JeffBezos (Founder of @Amazon and @BlueOrigin) is now following @ESYudkowsky

Related: "Amazon partners with startup Hugging Face for ChatGPT rival" (Los Angeles Times, Feb 21st 2023)

Thanks for reporting back! I’m sharing it with my friends as well (none of which are in tech and most of them live in fairly rural parts in Canada) to see their reaction.

-6
BrownHairedEevee
1y

Yeah, I'm definitely not disputing that some people will be alienated by this. My basic reaction is just: AI safety people are already familiar with EY's takes; I suspect people like my parents will read this and be like "whoa, this makes some sense and is kind of scary." (With regard to differing feeds, I just put the link to the article into the Twitter search bar and sorted by latest. I still think the negative responses are a minority.)

Here’s a comment I shared on my LessWrong shortform.

——

I’m still thinking this through, but I am deeply concerned about Eliezer’s new article for a combination of reasons:

  • I don’t think it will work.
  • Given that it won’t work, I expect we lose credibility and it now becomes much harder to work with people who were sympathetic to alignment, but still wanted to use AI to improve the world.
  • I am not convinced as he is about doom and I am not as cynical about the main orgs as he is.

In the end, I expect this will just alienate people. And stuff like this concerns me... (read more)

lilly
1y36
17
2

A couple of things make me inclined to disagree with you about whether this will alienate people, including:

1) The reaction on Twitter seems okay so far
2) Over the past few months, I've noticed a qualitative shift among non-EA friends/family regarding their concerns about AI; people seem worried
3) Some of the signatories of the FLI letter didn't seem to be the usual suspects; I have heard one prominent signatory openly criticize EA, so that feels like a shift, too
4) I think smart, reasonable people who have been exposed to ChatGPT but don't know much about... (read more)

The pay difference between working in industry and doing a PhD was a big factor for me to avoid getting a PhD a few years ago.

These days it still plays a role, though as an independent researcher I’d like to connect with more academics so that I can get better at doing research with more rigour and publish more papers. Avoiding the PhD has made this hard and I kind of have to have a lot more initiative to develop these skills that PhD students typically develop. That said, being able to selectively learn the skills that are actually useful for solving alig... (read more)

When I say "true," I simply mean that it is inevitable that these things are possible by some future AI system, but people have so many different definitions of AGI they could be calling GPT-3 some form of weak AGI and, therefore incapable of doing the things I described. I don't particularly care about "true" or "fake" AGI definitions, but just want to point out that the things I described are inevitable, and we are really not so far away (already) from the scenario I described above, whether you call this future system AGI or pre-AGI.

Situational awarenes... (read more)

A "true" AGI will have situational awareness and knows its weights were created with the help of code, eventually knows its training setup (and how to improve it), and also knows how to rewrite its code. These models can already write code quite well; it's only a matter of time before you can ask a language model to create a variety of architectures and training runs based on what it thinks will lead to a better model (all before "true AGI" IMO). It just may take it a bit longer to understand what each of its individual weights do and will have to rely on ... (read more)

3
Stuart Buck
1y
All of that seems question-begging. If we define "true AGI" as that which knows how to rewrite its own code, then that is indeed what a "true AGI" would be able to do. 

Since I expect some people to be a bit confused as to what exactly was the bad thing that has happened after reading this post, I think it would be great if the community health team could write a post explaining and pointing out exactly what was bad here and in other similar instances.

I think there is value in being crystal clear about what were the bad things that happened because I expect people will takeaway different things from this post.

Since noone else has, I'll try, downvote if you think this isn't worth reading. The badness is broken up into a number of different factors.

Most interactions don't lead to upset. So If we trust Owen's narrative, then he misread social cues in a way that upset his accuser by talking about masturbation when she didn't want to and so upset her. If you are a consequentialist, upsetting people is bad. If you are a deontologist, not taking time to understand boundaries such that you overstep them is bad.

If we trust his account, which I guess I do, they had talke... (read more)

quinn
1y16
15
11

Yeah as an extroverted male reading this makes me wonder if I'm supposed to be threatmodeling that I'll be promoted and gain movement power some day? Because being around for longer than someone else is informal power (?) and I'm responsible for futures in which that becomes formal power?

Everyone is confused and there's not a clear takeaway, IMO. 

I honestly didn’t know how to talk about it either, but wanted to point at general vibes I was getting. While I’m still confused about what‘s the issue exactly, contrary to my initial comment, I don’t really think polyamory within the community is a problem anymore. Not because of Arepo’s comment specifically, but because there are healthy ways to do polyamory just like other forms of relationships. It’s something that I thought was true before writing the comment, but was a bit confused about the whole mixing of career and “free love” with everyone in the... (read more)

4
Cornelis Dirk Haupt
1y
No judgement from me. You're talking to someone who used to be quite homophobic and polyphobic and having a caring community where I could be accepted for where I was and work through my thoughts without being labelled an insta-bigot was precisely what I needed. A friend of mine recently pointed out that polyamory during the 80's free love era still only made up like 0.8% of relationships in Canada. Today, even without a mass social movement, in Canada that figure sits around 5% - there has been such an increase that the Canadian government is actually examining the situation to try and figure out if laws should be changed (given the entire system pre-supposes monogamy).   What this suggests to me is that polyamory is orders of magnitude more visible now to EAs that wouldn't even have known much about it before (other than maybe in the abstract). Novelty of this sort can be uncomfortable (it was for me at first), hence your post getting so many upvotes. Many new to actually seeing polyamory in the real world feel uncomfortable too, even if they cant quite put a reason on why. I strongly urge anyone reading this sentence to watch Sonia's video.  Given we haven't heard the same kind of scandals (I don't think?) outside of the bay  (and there are many non-Bay Area poly EAs in the world) and women are reporting it is indeed worse in The Bay, I think looking at the entire situation through the lens of what is different in the Bay Area (i.e. Power Dynamics) is much more fruitful. nit: a lot of monogamous people engage in cuddle puddles. Problem here is, like you said, the career colleagues part leading to potential abuses of power dynamics. 

People have some strong opinions about things like polyamory, but I figured I’d still voice my concern as someone who has been in EA since 2015, but has mostly only interacted with the community online (aside from 2 months in the Bay and 2 in London):

I have nothing against polyamory, but polyamory within the community gives me bad vibes. And the mixing of work and fun seems to go much further than I think it should. It feels like there’s an aspect of “free love” and I am a little concerned about doing cuddle puddles with career colleagues. I feel like all ... (read more)

3
Arepo
1y
I would just like to note that the phrase, 'I have nothing against <minority group>, but...' should ring alarm bells for anyone who's ever been concerned about casual racism, sexism, ageism or any other socially-acceptable-at-the-time prejudice.
2
Gustavo Ramires
1y
I would say the relationship of a person is private, and it seems arrogant for us (Effective Altruists) to decide what relationship styles society at large should accept -- specially considering that we want to be welcome to all different cultures, from East and West, including indigenous cultures. What should not be acceptable is any form of harassment, and it seems like a pretty good universal norm that Effective Altruism community gatherings and workplaces should be focused on that mission - EA. That's not to say relationships are completely banned and shunned, but it should be common knowledge that this is not what EA is for (finding partners) - and advice that it should be strongly avoided.  It should be clear what EA spaces are for (not purely for socialization, for finding partners, etc., but for helping others effectively and discussing how to achieve that!) Note: unless there is clear consensual will from all parties and it happens outside EA of course - I don't think banning consensual relationships outright is wise or necessary.  Note2: I read a comment somewhere recently that 'You are allowed to ask people out at essentially all places, as long as there is immediate acceptance/consensus; however many places rightfully ban non-consensual approaches, i.e. rejected approaches. This may seem unfair, but it isn't since there are really many other places that allow people to meet each other and where the norms allow asking people out'. We should promote a spirit of inclusiveness of all cultures and persons, and this probably requires establishing some norms around avoiding some kinds of behavior. Edit: There seems to be strong disagreement about this comment, I'd appreciate clarifications. I might retract some things.

Consider using Conjecture’s new Verbalize (https://lemm.ai/home) STT tool for transcriptions! They’ll be adding some LLM features on top of it, and I expect it to have some cool features in coming out this year.

I’ve been also pushing (for a while) for more people within EA to start thinking of ways to apply LLMs to our work. After ChatGPT, some people started saying similar stuff so I’m glad people are starting to see the opportunity.

2
Alexander Saeri
1y
Thanks Jacques, I'll need to check this out. Appreciate the pointer and keen to hear more about an LLM layer on this (e.g., identifying action items or summarising key decision points in a meeting, etc). 

Are there any actual rigorous calculations on this? It's hard for me to believe someone making $2M/year and donating $1M/year (to AI Safety or top GW charities) would have less counterfactual impact than someone working at CEA.

Edit: Let's say you are donating $1M/year to AI Safety, that might be about enough to cover the salary for about 9 independent alignment researchers. Though, those 9 researchers might not be yet comparable to top-level researchers who would get funding regardless. So, it would probably end up as additional funding for getting more yo... (read more)

5
Ben_West
1y
The claim isn't that every person is better off doing direct work than donating to every organization. Just the specific claim that I generally prefer the labor of my top candidate to donations. Even in your example though: if you are (say) an ML engineer senior enough to be donating $1M+/year, I expect that those nine junior researchers might prefer your mentorship to your money.  (I really want to emphasize Yonatan's point of actually doing the math though. The thing I dislike is when people just assume that their current path is obviously correct, and don't actually bother to find some junior researchers and ask them if they would prefer money versus mentorship.)

Thanks for doing this!

In terms of feedback: the most annoying thing so far is that as soon as you click on any grant, going 'back' to the previous page puts you back at a completely fresh search. You can't click to open up new tabs either.

2
Rachel Weinberg
1y
Thanks for the feedback! Working on it, should be fixed tomorrow. I made it so you can click to open in new tabs, but not the 'back' issue. That's more difficult.

I want to say that I appreciate posts like this by parents in the community. I'm an alignment researcher and given how fast things are moving, I do worry that I'm under-weighting the amount of impact I could lose in the next 10 years if I have kids. I feel like 'short timelines' make my decision harder even though I'm convinced I want kids in 5 or so years from now.

Some considerations I've been having lately:

  • Should I move far away from my parents, which would make it harder to depend on someone for childcare on the weekends and evenings? Will we be close t
... (read more)
6
Geoffrey Miller
1y
Jacques -- these are really tough questions. Deciding whether to have kids is one thing in a relatively technologically & economically stable society (e.g. 12th century Europe). It seems incredibly uncertain in 2023, given expected accelerations in certain technologies (e.g. AI), and short time horizons for influencing their development. I will say this though: probably in every generation since the Industrial Revolution, young potential parents have faced what seemed to be historically unprecedented rates of acceleration in technology and social disruption, that required their urgent attention. When I had my first kid in the mid-90s, it seemed like the Internet would change everything, China would overtake the West very soon, EU integration would change the whole economic fabric of Europe, etc -- and that all sort of happened, but it didn't really change family life all that much. I'm glad I didn't wait to see how it would all play out, and that I didn't devote every waking hour to trying to nudge Internet development in more human-aligned directions.  In other words, the near-term future might be radically different from now, but that's been true for a couple hundred years, and parents and kids carry on doing their thing regardless.

Yeah, I agree. Though I feel I can imagine a lot of startups or businesses that require a lot of work, but don't require as much brain power. I could have chosen a sector that doesn't move as fast as AI (which has an endless stream of papers and posts to keep track of) and just requires me to build a useful product/service for people. Being in a pre-paradigmatic field where things feel like they are moving insanely fast can feel overwhelming.

I don't know, being in a field that I think feels much more high-risk and forces me to grapple with difficult concep... (read more)

As an example: I specifically chose to start working on AI alignment rather than trying to build startups to try to fund EA because of SBF.  I would probably be making a lot more money had I took a different route and would likely not have to deal with being in such a shaky, intense field where I’ve had to put parts of my life on hold for.

2
Jeff Kaufman
1y
That's startups too, no?

I mostly agree with Buck’s comment and I think we should probably dedicate more time to this at EAGs than we have in the past (and probably some other events). I’m not sure what is the best format, but I think having conversations about it would allow us to feel it much more in our bones rather than just discussing it on the EA forum for a few days and mostly forget about it.

I believe that most of these in-person discussions seem to have mostly happened at the EA Leaders Forum, so we should probably change that.

That said, I’m concerned that a lot of people... (read more)

Context: I work as an alignment researcher. Mostly with language models.

I consider myself very risk-averse, but I also personally struggled (and still do) with the instability of alignment. There’s just so many things I feel like I’m sacrificing to work in the field and being an independent researcher right now feels so shaky. That said, I’ve weighed the pros and cons and still feel like it’s worth it for me. This was only something I truly felt in my bones a few months after taking the leap. It was in the back of my mind for ~5 years (and two 80k coaching... (read more)

1
mmKALLL
1y
Thank you for sharing your thoughts! It's helpful to know that others have been struggling with a similar situation. Through investigating the need and potential for projects, it seems there are vaguely two main areas for engineers: 1. Research engineering, it seems to be essentially helping researchers build prototypes and run models as smoothly as possible. 2. Various meta-projects that grow the talent pool or enable knowledge to be gained and shared more efficiently. The ones in the post you linked fall under this. It seems like getting (more useful) summaries of papers and blog posts is in very high demand. I wonder if Elicit (https://elicit.org/) is useful enough to somewhat alleviate that problem already. I also came across this list of engineering project ideas while investigating: https://alignment.dev/ I'm thinking that working on one of these could be a useful entry point. It seems viable to do while studying the field itself.

Here's a relevant tweet thread.

One response from Ollie:

I feel like we need stronger communication coming from event organizers regarding these things. Even though it doesn't affect me personally.

Load more