Risks from Learned Optimization: Introduction by evhub, Chris van Merwijk, vlad_m, Joar Skalse, Scott Garrabrant.
[Part 2] Amplifying generalist research via forecasting – results from a preliminary exploration by jacobjacob, ozziegooen, Elizabeth, NunoSempere, bgold.
We're half way through the second annual review, and 121 posts have been nominated
We've had more than double the number of individual nominations than last year, but on reviews we're still playing catchup. Last year we had 118 reviews, yet this year we've only had 51 so far.
When there's so many posts, it can be daunting to figure out which ones to review, so to help out, I'm making this thread. Every comment on this thread will be a post, and you should vote on which ones you would like to read a review of.
A review is something ideally that puts it in context of a broader conversation, describes its key contributions, its strengths and flaws, and where more work can be done.
(Or something else. Many people who write self-reviews often give a different flavor of review. And I've read many great short reviews, e.g. Jameson Quinn and Zvi last year did a lot of short reviews that communicated their impression of the post quite clearly.)
So I'm going to leave 122 comments on this post. 121 comments will just be a post title, and the other one will be for thread meta. (Search "Meta Thread".) I will remove my own votes from them, so they all start at zero.
Please vote on the comments to show how much you'd like to see reviews of different posts! Feel free to add a comment about what sort of review you'd like to see.
(Yes, I will probably get a lot of karma from this thread. Mwahaha you have fallen for my evil trap.)
(Also, my thanks to reviewers magfrump and Zvi with 5 each, johnswentworth with 6 reviews, and to fiddler with 10 (!), all thoughtful and valuable.)