Small bets allow you to get cheap signaling. Larger amounts force people to be at least a little more serious. FWIW, I offered Remmelt to do more.

It was difficult to come up with operationalizations for investment metrics. Remmelt wanted things like AI & ML VC deal activity being <30% and Anthropic valuation <$30B. I wanted things like % of YC startups being AI-related and didn't want some large investment round in SpaceX or Stripe dominate funds raised.

Thanks for writing this. I've told other people this in the past.

Should EA avoid using AI art for non-research purposes?

To the contrary, you probably cost the AI labs a bunch of compute and this is the overwhelming effect.

Also, the environmental costs are tiny. If you are doing it for the environment, nearly all your environmental footprint is your diet and transportation, not electricity usage.

Sometimes rationalist-y people and lawyers really like to use/insist on maximally precise/literal language or legalese. I have a word for lawyers who do this in my business interactions with them; shitty lawyers.

I'm somewhat sympathetic to these people since it allows for exact communication and for some, it makes truthful information sharing easier. However, this just isn't how the world works. What you point to simply isn't fraud by the commonplace usage of the word. What you mean is that by your interpretation, they should advertise 285 piglets/dollar and not 354 and that you don't think their reason for stating 354 isn't well supported.

Again, this over-the-top and inflammatory language is hurting rather than helping you and the animal welfare movement.

Vote power should scale with karma

To a point, maybe a bit less than it does currently but in general it seems to work well. 

A great number of EAs in America/Europe could learn a lot from you.

Remmelt, if you wish, I'm happy to operationalize a bet. I think you're wrong.

I think people are, generally speaking, being too simplistic between "capabilities" and "alignment". I assume most people on the forum use ChatGPT/Claude or other LLM apps and don't think they pose, in their current form, much of a safety concern.

I am far more concerned of "geniuses in a data center" which Dario/Sam seem to be pushing for, than I am of more economically useful AI. 

I furthermore think that Matthew and to a lesser extent, Tamay and Ege have engaged significantly with AI risk arguments than most people.

Disclosure: I'm one of the investors in Mechanize

can you spell out the clear plan? feel free to DM me also