Any favored resources on metta?

If we solve the problem normally thought of as "misalignment", it seems like this scenario would now go well. If we solve the problem normally thought of as "misuse", it seems like this scenario would now go well. This argues for continuing to use these categories, as fixing the problems they name is still sufficient to solve problems that do not cleanly fit in one bucket or another

Sure!

I see people on twitter, for example, doing things like having GPT-3 provide autocomplete or suggestions while they're writing, or doing grunt work of producing web apps. Plausibly, figuring out how to get the most value out of future AI developments for improving productivity is important.

There's an issue that it's not very obvious exactly how to prepare for various AI tools in the future. One piece of work could be thinking more about how to flexibly prepare for AI tools with unknown capabilities, or predicting what the capabilities will be.

Other things that come to mind are:

• Practice getting up to speed in new tool setups. If you are very bound to a setup that you like, you might have a hard time leveraging these advances as they come along. Alternatively, try and be sure you can extend your current workflow
• Increase the attention you pay to new (AI) tools. Get used to trying them out, both for the reasons above and because it may be important to act fast in picking up very helpful new tools

To be clear, it's not super clear to me how much value there is in this direction. It is pretty plausible to me that AI tooling will be essential for competitive future productivity, but maybe there's not much of an opportunity to bet on that

Now, it's still possible that accumulation of slow-turnover senescent cells could cause the increased production rate of fast-turnover senescent cells.

Reminds me of this paper, in which they replaced the blood of old rats with a neutral solution (not the blood of young rats), and found large rejuvinative effects. IIRC, they attributed it to knocking the old rats out of some sort of "senescent equilibrium"

Even more so, I would love to see your unjustifiable stab-in-the-dark intuitions as to where the center of all this is

Curious why this in particular (not trying to take umbrage with wanting this info; I agree that there’s a lot of useful data here. Would be a thing I’d also want to ask for, but wouldn’t have prioritised)

Seems like you’re missing an end to the paragraph that starts “Related argument”

I liked your example of being uncertain of your probabilities. I note that if you are trying to make an even money bet with a friend (as this is a simple Schelling point), you should never Kelly bet if you have discounted rate of 2/3 or less of your naïve probabilities.

The maximum bet for $kp-\left(\right(1-kp)+(1-k\left)p\right)$ is when $p$ is 1, which is $3k-2,$ which crosses below 0 at $k=\frac{2}{3}$

In the pie chart in the Teams section, you can see "CooperateBot [Larks]" and "CooperateBot [Insub]"

Yeah, that's what my parenthetical was supposed to address

(particularly because there is large interpersonal variation in the strength of hedging a given qualifier is supposed to convey)

Perhaps you are able to get more reliable information out of such statements than I am.