Pitching my AI safety blog: I write about what AI companies are doing in terms of safety. My best recent post is AI companies' eval reports mostly don't support their claims. See also my websites ailabwatch.org and aisafetyclaims.org collecting and analyzing public information on what companies are doing; my blog will soon be the main way to learn about new content on my sites.
I would be excited about someone doing a blog on what the companies are doing RE AI policy (including comms that are relevant to policy or directed at policymakers.)
I suspect good posts from such a blog would be shared reasonably frequently among tech policy staffers in DC.
(Not necessarily saying this needs to be you).
Pitching the Redwood Research substack: We write a lot of content about technical AI safety focused on AI control.[1] This ranges from stuff like "what are the returns to compute/algorithms once AIs already beat top human experts" to "Making deals with early schemers" to "Comparing risk from internally-deployed AI to insider and outsider threats from humans".
We also cross post this to LessWrong, but subscribing on substack is an easy to guarantee you see our content. ↩︎
Other good blogs & websites that I think are very under-rated:
My blog taste tends long-content, focused on positive over normative claims, detail-rich, specialized.
Gwern still releases his monthly newsletters, he just stopped crossposting them to substack. Though admittedly, there's less commentary and overall content. Here's the january 2025 one.
I've randomly stumbled upon this back in march.
I want to pitch my blog. I'm writing about tech and AI from a business perspective.
Think of it like Ben Thompson's Stratecherry. But with longer deep dives, a more conversational tone, and much less disregard for Safety.
My last piece was a second look at Grok 3, after they released the API.
Substack recommendations are remarkably important, and the actual best reason to write here instead of elsewhere.
As in, even though I have never made an active attempt to seek recommendations, approximately half of my subscribers come from recommendations from other blogs. And for every two subscribers I have, my recommendations have generated approximately one subscription elsewhere. I am very thankful to all those who have recommended this blog, either through substack or otherwise.
As the blog has grown, I’ve gotten a number of offers for reciprocal recommendations. So far I have turned all of these down, because I have yet to feel any are both sufficiently high quality and a good match for me and my readers.
Instead, I’m going to do the following:
I have a very high bar for being willing to go behind a paywall, the same way I have decided not to have one of my own. If something is behind a unique paywall, then almost all of my readers can’t read it, and the post is effectively outside of the broader conversation. So not only do I have to be excited enough about the content to initiate a subscription, I have to be excited enough despite it being unavailable to others.
I am of course happy to accept and respond to gift subscriptions for various content, including other blogs and newspapers, which substantially increase the chance I read, discuss or ultimately recommend the content in question.
Going over this list, I notice that I highly value a unique focus and perspective, a way of thinking and a set of tools that I want to have available, that is compatible with the rationalist-style perspective of thinking with gears and figuring out what will actually work versus not work. I want to be offered a part of that elephant I would otherwise miss, a different reality-tunnel to incorporate into my own.
What I do not need to do is agree with the person about most things. I have profound and increasing important disagreements with most of the people on this list. When I recommend the substack, I am absolutely not endorsing the opinions or worldview contained therein.
I also reminded myself, doing this, that there is a lot of great content I simply don’t have the time to check out properly, especially recently with several things creating big temporary additional time commitments, that will continue for a few more weeks.
Scott Alexander is one of the great ones. If you haven’t dived into the Slate Star Codex archives, you should do that sometime. In My Culture, many of those posts are foundational, and I link back to a number of them periodically.
There was a period of years during the SSC era when Scott Alexander had very obviously the best blog by a wide margin, and everyone I knew would drop what they were doing and read posts whenever they came out.
I do think that golden age has passed for now, and things have slipped somewhat. I can get frustrated, especially when he focuses on Effective Altruist content. I usually skip the guest posts unless something catches my eye.
That still leaves this as my top Substack or personal blog.
Robin Hanson is unique. I hope he never changes, and never stops Robin Hansoning.
Most of the time, when I read one of his posts, I disagree with it. But it is almost always interesting, and valuable to think about exactly what I disagree with and why. The questions are always big. I could happily write an expanded response to most of his posts, as I have done a number of times in the past. I would do this more if AI wasn’t taking up so much attention.
I find Hanson frustrating on AI in particular, especially on Twitter where he discusses this more often and more freely. We strongly disagree on all aspects of AI, including over its economic value and pace of progress, and whether we should welcome it causing human extinction. That part I actually like, that’s him Robin Hansoning.
What I do not like, but also find valuable in its own way, is that he often seems willing, especially on Twitter, to amplify essentially anything related to AI that makes one of his points, highlight pull quotes supporting those points, and otherwise act in a way that I see as compromising his otherwise very strong epistemic standards.
The reason I find this valuable is that this then acts as a forcing function to ensure I consider and am aware of opposing rhetoric and arguments, and retain balance.
Before we first met up so he could interview me for his book On the Edge, I knew I had a lot in common with Nate Silver. I’ve been following him since Baseball Prospectus. Only when we talked more, and when I read the final book, did I realize quite how much we matched up in interests and ways of thinking. I hope to do a collaboration at some point if the time can be found.
His politics model will probably always be what we most remember him for, but Silver Bulletin is Nate Silver’s best non-modeling work, and it also comes with the modern version of the politics model that remains the best game in town when properly understood in context. He offers a unique form of grounding on political, sports and other issues, and a way of bridging my kinds of ideas into mainstream discourse. I almost never regret reading.
Sarah is one of my closest friends, and at one point was one of my best employees.
In her blog she covers opportunities in science and technology, and also in society, and offers a mix of doing the research and explaining it in ways few others can, pointing our attention in places it would not otherwise go but that are often worth going to, and offering her unique perspectives on many questions.
If these topics are relevant to your interests, you should absolutely jump on this. If there’s one blog that deserves more of my attention than it gets, if only I had more time to actually dig deep, this would be it.
No one drills down into the practical, detail level in an accessible way as well as Brian Potter. One needs grounding in these kinds of physical details. When AI was going less crazy, and I was spending a lot more time on diverse topics especially housing and energy, I was always excited to dive into one of this posts. They very much help distinguish what is and is not important, and where to put your focus, helping you build models made of gears.
I noticed compiling this list that I haven’t been reading these posts for a while due to lack of time, but the moment I went there I was excited to dive back in, and the most recent post is definitely going directly into the queue. My current plan is to do a full catching up before my next housing roundup.
There is something highly refreshing about the way Kling offers his own consistent old school economic libertarian perspective, takes his time responding to anything, and generally tries to understand everything including developments in AI from that perspective. He knows a few important things and it is good to get reminders of them. He often offers links, the curation of which is good enough that they are worth considering.
Perhaps never has a man more simultaneously given both all and none of the f***s.
Dominic writes with a combination of urgency, deep intellectual curiosity and desire to explain things across a huge variety of topics, and utter contempt for all those idiots trying to run our civilization and especially its governments, or for what anyone else thinks, or for the organizing principles of writing.
He screams into the void, warning that so many things are going wrong, that all of politics is incompetent to either achieve outcomes or even win elections, and for us to all wake up and stop acting like utter idiots. What he cares about is what actually works and would work, and what actually happened or will happen.
His posts are collections of snippets even more than mine, jumping from one thing to another, trying to weave them together over time to explain various important things about today and from history that people almost never notice.
I find a dose of these perspectives highly valuable. One needs to learn from people, even when you disagree with them on quite a lot of things, and to be clear I disagree with Dominic on many big things. I feel I understand the world substantially better than I would have without Dominic. One does not need to in any way approve of his politics or preferences, starting of course with Brexit, to benefit from these insights.
Similar to Dominic Cummings and Robin Hanson, I think most people who read this would benefit from a healthy dose, at least once, of Bryan Caplan and the way he views the world, offering us a different reality tunnel where things you don’t consider are emphasized and things you often emphasize are dismissed rather than considered.
Bryan expresses himself as if he is supremely confident he is right about everything, that everyone else is simply obviously wrong about them, and that the reasoning is very simple, if only you would listen. You want this voice as part of the chorus in your head.
I found The Case Against Education and Selfish Reasons To Have More Kids both extremely valuable.
However, I do notice that I feel like I already have enough of this voice on the issues he emphasizes most often, especially calls for free markets including open borders. So I notice that I am increasingly skipping more of his posts on these subjects.
This blog is of course primarily about politics, in particular how much better he thinks everything would be if normie Democrats were moderate, and supported policies that were both good and popular and did the things that win elections and improved outcomes, and how to go about doing that. He takes a very proto-rationalist, practical approach to this, that I very much appreciate, complete with yearly predictions. The writing is consistently enjoyable and clear.
It is important to think carefully about exactly how much politics one wants to engage with, and in which ways, and with what balance of incoming perspectives. Many of us should minimize such exposure most of the time.
Cate Hall is a super awesome person and her blog is all about taking that and then saying ‘and so can you.’ She shares various tricks and tactics she has used to be more agentic and happier and make her life better. They definitely won’t all work for you or be good ideas for you, but the rate of return on considering them, why they might work and what you might want to do with them is fantastic, and it’s a joy to read about it.
I have to be extremely stingy recommending AI blogs, because the whole point of my AI blog is that you shouldn’t need to read either AI Twitter or the other AI blogs, because I hope to consistently flag such things.
There are still a few that made the list.
This is the blog for AI Futures Project which includes AI 2027. A lot of the posts explain the thinking behind how they model the AI future, aimed at a broader audience. Others include advocacy, consistently for modest common sense proposals. All of it is written with a much lower barrier to entry than my work, and I find the writing consistently strong and interesting.
This is very much a case of someone largely doing a subset of what I am doing, finding, summarizing and responding to key news events with an emphasis on AI. So I would hope that if you read my AI posts, you don’t also need to directly read Peter. But he has a remarkably high hit rate of finding things I would have otherwise overlooked or offering useful new perspective. If you are looking for something shorter and sweeter, and easier to process, or to compare multiple sources, this is one of the best choices.
China Talk focuses on China, as the name suggests, and also largely on Chinese AI and other Chinese tech. When this is good and on point, it is very, very good, and provides essential perspective I couldn’t have found elsewhere, especially when doing key interviews.
It is highly plausible that I should be focusing way more on these topics.
He hasn’t posted since January, but I hope he gets back to it. We need more musings, especially musings I strongly disagree with so I can think about and explain why I disagree with them. I still would like to give better arguments in response to his thoughts.
Once a month you used to get a collection of notes and links, without my emphasis on the new hotness. The curation level was consistently excellent.
I saved these, so that if I ever have need of more good content, I could look here. But it’s now been four years since his updates have been posted here.
Without loss of generality, all of these would be highly reasonable for me to include in my recommendation list, might well do so in the future after more consideration, and for which I would be happy to offer reciprocity:
The Pursuit of Happiness (Scott Sumner) about things Sumner, including economics, culture and movies.
Knowingness (Aella) about Aella things, often sexual.
Second Person (Jacob Falkovich) about dating.
Derek Thompson (Derek Thompson) about things in general.
Works In Progress (Various) about progress studies.
The Grumpy Economist (John Cochrane) about free markets and economics.
Dwarkesh Podcast (Dwarkesh Patel) mostly hosts the podcast. I highly recommend the podcast and watch him on YouTube.
Rising Tide (Helen Toner) about AI policy.
Understanding AI (Timothy Lee) about AI and tech.
One Useful Thing (Ethan Mullick) about AI.
Import AI (Jack Clark) about AI.
My review process for each blog by default is to look at two to four posts, depending on how it is going, with a mix of best-of posts or what catches my eye, and at least one most recent post to avoid cherry-picking.
It is remarkable how few blogs are left that are not Substack, that I still want to read.
Most of the remaining alpha in blogs is in Marginal Revolution and LessWrong. Without either of those this blog would be a lot worse.
And of course, there is always there is Twitter.
I always check all posts from my followers and the Rationalist and AI lists.
In total that is on the order of 500 unique accounts.
This effectively is the majority of my consumption, if you include things I find via Twitter.
I write this guide back in March 2022 on how to best use Twitter to follow events in real time. Using Twitter to follow AI is somewhat different since it is less about real time developments and more about catching all the important stories, but most of the advice there still applies today.
If I had to make one change to the ‘beware’ list it would be that I did not emphasize enough the need to aggressively block people whose posts make your life worse, especially in the sense of making you emotionally worse off without compensation, or that draw you into topics you want to avoid, or that indicate general toxicity. A block is now even more than before only a small mistake, as they can still see your posts. If someone has not provided value before, a hair trigger is appropriate. This includes blocking people whose posts are shown to you via someone’s retweet.
The other note is that I take care to cultivate a mix of perspectives. I keep a number of accounts around so that I know what the other half is thinking, in various ways, especially legacy accounts that I was already following for another reason, many of which pivoted to AI in one way or another. I also count on them to ‘bubble up’ the key posts from the accounts that are truly obnoxious, too much so to put on the lists. One as to protect one’s own mental health. The rule is then that I can’t simply dismiss what those sources have to say out of hand, although of course sometimes what they say is not newsworthy.
I consume writing and write about it as a full time job. Most people of course cannot do this, plus you hopefully want to read this blog too, so you’ll have to be a lot more picky than this. If I was primarily working on something else, I’d be consuming vastly less content than I am now, and even now I don’t fully read a lot of these.
What am I potentially missing here, and should consider including? I encourage sharing in the comments, especially in the Substack comments. You are free to pitch your own work, but do say you are doing so.