I think “alignment/capabilities > 1” is a closer heuristic than “alignment/capabilities > average”, in the sense of ‘[fraction of remaining alignment this solves] / [fraction of remaining capabilities this solves]’. That’s a sufficient condition if all research does it, though not IRL e.g. given pure capabilities research also exists; but I think it’s still a necessary condition for something to be net helpful.
It feels like what’s missing is more like… gears of how to compare “alignment” to “capabilities” applications for a particular piece of research. Like, what’s the thing I should actually be imagining when thinking about that “ratio”?
I think “alignment/capabilities > 1” is a closer heuristic than “alignment/capabilities > average”, in the sense of ‘[fraction of remaining alignment this solves] / [fraction of remaining capabilities this solves]’. That’s a sufficient condition if all research does it, though not IRL e.g. given pure capabilities research also exists; but I think it’s still a necessary condition for something to be net helpful.
It feels like what’s missing is more like… gears of how to compare “alignment” to “capabilities” applications for a particular piece of research. Like, what’s the thing I should actually be imagining when thinking about that “ratio”?