Writer

Head and main scriptwriter @ Rational Animations
1041 karmaJoined
www.youtube.com/RationalAnimations
0

Bio

Impact Markets link: https://app.impactmarkets.io/profile/clfljvejd0012oppubuwne2k2

Comments
78

For me, perhaps the biggest takeaway from Aschenbrenner's manifesto is that even if we solve alignment, we still have an incredibly thorny coordination problem between the US and China, in which each is massively incentivized to race ahead and develop military power using superintelligence, putting them both and the rest of the world at immense risk. And I wonder if, after seeing this in advance, we can sit down and solve this coordination problem in ways that lead to a better outcome with a higher chance than the "race ahead" strategy and don't risk encountering a short period of incredibly volatile geopolitical instability in which both nations develop and possibly use never-seen-before weapons of mass destruction.

Edit: although I can see how attempts at intervening in any way and raising the salience of the issue risk making the situation worse.

I think his answer is here:

Some hope for some sort of international treaty on safety. This seems fanciful to me. The world where both the CCP and USG are AGI-pilled enough to take safety risk seriously is also the world in which both realize that international economic and military predominance is at stake, that being months behind on AGI could mean being permanently left behind. If the race is tight, any arms control equilibrium, at least in the early phase around superintelligence, seems extremely unstable. In short, ”breakout” is too easy: the incentive (and the fear that others will act on this incentive) to race ahead with an intelligence explosion, to reach superintelligence and the decisive advantage, too great.

At the very least, the odds we get something good-enough here seem slim. (How have those climate treaties gone? That seems like a dramatically easier problem compared to this.)

I think we still see really good engagement with the videos themselves. The average view duration for the AI video is currently 58.7% of the video, and 25% of viewers watched the whole video

This average percentage relates to organic traffic only, right? The paid traffic APV must look much lower, something like 5%?

No, for now, we aren't committing to any specific type of niche!

Thumbs up to this summary. My only nitpick is that I wouldn't call Mana "virtual currency" since it could be confused with cryptocurrency, while it's mere internet points.

There is a single winner so far, and it will be announced with the corresponding video release. The contest is still open, though!

Edit: another person claimed a bonus prize, too.

Easy fix: let the user pick a discounted sum of future income. It could also be calculated using some average over past daily income if that's available to see.

Answer by Writer11
0
0

There's a maybe naive way of seeing their plan that leads to this objection:

"Once we have AIs that are human-level AI alignment researchers, it's already too late. That's already very powerful and goal-directed general AI, and we'll be screwed soon after we develop it, either because it's dangerous in itself or because it zips past that capability level fast since it's an AI researcher, after all."

What do you make of it?

No, but we'll need more than one voice actor for some videos. We'll consider you for those occasions if you send us your portfolio.

Can I promote your courses without restraint on Rational Animations? I think it would be a good idea since people can go through the readings by themselves. My calls to action would be similar to this post I made on the Rational Animations' subreddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/RationalAnimations/comments/146p13h/the_ai_safety_fundamentals_courses_are_great_you/

Load more