Mateusz Bagiński

Primarily interested in agent foundations. AI macrostrategy. and enhancement of human intelligence, sanity, and wisdom.

I endorse and operate by Crocker's rules.

I have not signed any agreements whose existence I cannot mention.

Wikitag Contributions

Load More

Comments

Sorted by

Is there any research on how the actual impact of [the kind of AI that we currently have] lives up to the expectations from the time [shortly before we had that kind of AI but close enough that we could clearly see it coming]?

This is vague but not unreasonable periods for the second time would be:

  • After OA Copilot, before ChatGPT (so summer-autumn 2022).
  • After PaLM, before Copilot.
  • After GPT-2, before GPT-3.

I'm also interested in research on historical over- and under-performance of other tech (where "we kinda saw it (or could see) it coming") relative to expectations.

(FWIW it doesn't land on me at all.)

Did Yang's campaign backfire in some way?

I haven't looked into this in detail but I would be quite surprised if Voyager didn't do any of that?

Although I'm not sure whether what you're asking for is exactly what you're looking for. It seems straightforward that if you train/fine-tune a model on examples of people playing a game that involves leveraging [very helpful but not strictly necessary] resources, you are going to get an AI capable of that.

It would be more non-trivial if you got an RL agent doing that, especially if it didn't stumble into that strategy/association "I need to do X, so let me get Y first" by accident but rather figured that Y tends to be helpful for X via some chain of associations.

Are there any memes prevalent in the US government that make racing to AGI with China look obviously foolish?

The "let's race to AGI with China" meme landed for a reason. Is there something making the US gov susceptible to some sort of counter-meme, like the one expressed in this comment by Gwern?

This but to the extent that people reading him have not clearly already decided on their conclusion, it might be worth it to engage.

The purpose of a debate is not to persuade the debater, it's to persuade the audience. (Modulo that this frame is more soldier-mindset-y than truth-seeking but you know what I mean.)

I dont think this strategy works well. You shouldn't try to fight yourself. You cannot win.

I think sapphire is making a claim about the family of strategies you're discussing in the post.

Major sleep debt?

Probably either one of (or some combination of): (1) "g" is the next consonant after "c" in "cognitive"; (2) leakage from "g-factor"; (3) leakage from "general(ly good at thinking)"

(BTW first you say "CQ" and then "GQ")

  • Sleep deprived a little, like stay up really late but without sleep debt: +5 GQ points.

Are you sure about the sign here?

I think I'm more prone to some kinds of creative/divergent thinking when I'm mildly to moderately sleep-deprived (at least sometimes in productive directions) but also worse in precise/formal/mathetmatical thinking about novel/unfamiliar stuff. So the features are pulled apart.

Load More