Noah Scales — LessWrong

I am wondering how Less Wrong would improve ChatGPT's filtering? I'm reading through the comments on breaking OpenAI's filtering, and see plenty of analysis of the weaknesses of the safeguards. There's always the chance that some group could steal ChatGPT's source code and remove ad hoc additions to it, so I'll ask the question in this form:

How would you change ChatGPT's purpose, design, or function to enforce topic and content filtering of its output?

Thanks for your thoughts.

Replying toWhen do you visualize (or not) while doing math?

Noah ScalesNov 24, 2022

When do you visualize (or not) while doing math?

How I do math that starts out as a mathematical expression

I learned how to do math on paper or blackboard, except for an interlude at a Montessori school, where we used physical media. After a while, any math problem that took the form of a listing of mathematical expressions was one to solve with successive string manipulations. The initial form implied a set of transformations and a write-up that I had to perform. By looking at what I just wrote, and plotting how to create a transformation closer to my final answer, but with just a few manipulations of the earlier expression, I would record successive approaches to the final answer.

"Move the... (read 511 more words →)

Replying toAgainst a General Factor of Doom

Noah Scales3y*

Against a General Factor of Doom

Correlations among AGI doomer predictions could reveal common AI Safety milestones

I am curious about how considerations of overlaps could lead to a list of milestones for positive results in AI safety research. If there are enough exit points from pathways to AI doom available through AI Safety improvements, a catalog of those improvements might be visible in models of correlations among AI Safety researcher's predictions about AGI doom of various sorts.

But as a sidenote, here's my response to your mention of climate researchers thinking in terms of P(Doom).

Commonalities among climate scientists that are pessimistic about climate change and geo-engineering

Doubts held by pessimistic climate scientists about future climate plausibly include:

countries meeting climate commitments

... (read more)

Replying toHere's the exit.

Noah Scales3y*

Here's the exit.

You wrote:

I'm not sure I understand your question. Do you mean, why wouldn't someone who's running the engine I describe end up resenting things like OpenAI that seem to be accelerating AI risk?

For one, I think they often do.

Oh. Good! I'm a bit relieved to read that. Yes, that was the fundamental question that I had. I think that shows common-sense.

I'm curious what you think a sober response to AGI research is for someone whose daily job is working on AI Safety, if you want to discuss that in more detail. Otherwise, thank you for your answer.

Replying toHere's the exit.

Noah Scales3y*

Here's the exit.

I'm a little surprised that doomerism could take off like this, dominate one's thoughts, and yet fail to create resentment and anger toward of its apparent cause ~~source~~. Is that something that was absent for you or was it not relevant to discuss here?

I wonder:

in the prediction of doom, as the threat seems to be growing closer, does that create resentment or anger at apparent sources of that doom? If I dwelled on AI existential risk, I would feel more resentment of sources of that risk.
do the responses to that doom, or desperation of measures, become wilder as one thinks about it more? Just a passing thought about AI doom immediately brings

... (read more)