This is a special post for quick takes by David Rein. Only they can create top-level comments. Comments here also appear on the Quick Takes page and All Posts page.
I feel like I don't understand why people care about or use the "propensity" vs. "capability" distinction when talking about CoT controllability.
It seems like just an obviously poor conceptual framework for the problem: so many people get stuck on the question "is it fundamentally incapability? or is it 'just' propensity?", which just isn't answerable/well-formed.
I feel like it's totally fine/natural/easy to just talk about likelihood in different settings, and I think this concept causes more problems than it solves. Ok rant over—curious if people strongly disagree!