I don’t understand why the scribble method is helpful at all. It seems like you’re just lossely transforming some sort of internal probability distribution (e.g. 10% very super exponential, 20% modestly super exponentials, 40% on trend, 20% modest slowdown, 10% hit a wall) into individual trendlines and then turning those back into probabilities. Like how are you deciding how many scribbles to keep roughly on the exponential? If you start with a probability, why convert that into scribbles?
It seems like you’re just lossely transforming some sort of internal probability distribution (e.g. 10% very super exponential, 20% modestly super exponentials, 40% on trend, 20% modest slowdown, 10% hit a wall) into individual trendlines and then turning those back into probabilities.
I agree that this is an accurate description. The reason I find it helpful is that I find it much easier to inspect my internal probability distribution through the API of “sample one possible future” than by directly trying to postulate number like “what is the probability that the METR timeline reaches X horizon by date Y”.
I guess to each their own. Personally, I don’t even know how I’d go about sampling one possible future without first making my probability distribution explicit. It’s hard for me to imagine someone else being able to do that in a meaningful way, but that very well may be a failure of imagination!
Meanwhile, I don’t even know what it would mean to make a probability distribution explicit. The space of curves a trendline might follow in the future is a high dimensional object. Stating a distribution over that space of curves is not a simple thing to do.
I don’t understand why the scribble method is helpful at all. It seems like you’re just lossely transforming some sort of internal probability distribution (e.g. 10% very super exponential, 20% modestly super exponentials, 40% on trend, 20% modest slowdown, 10% hit a wall) into individual trendlines and then turning those back into probabilities. Like how are you deciding how many scribbles to keep roughly on the exponential? If you start with a probability, why convert that into scribbles?
I agree that this is an accurate description. The reason I find it helpful is that I find it much easier to inspect my internal probability distribution through the API of “sample one possible future” than by directly trying to postulate number like “what is the probability that the METR timeline reaches X horizon by date Y”.
I guess to each their own. Personally, I don’t even know how I’d go about sampling one possible future without first making my probability distribution explicit. It’s hard for me to imagine someone else being able to do that in a meaningful way, but that very well may be a failure of imagination!
Meanwhile, I don’t even know what it would mean to make a probability distribution explicit. The space of curves a trendline might follow in the future is a high dimensional object. Stating a distribution over that space of curves is not a simple thing to do.