if you insist on my being Bayesian and providing a direction of predictable error when I claim predictable error then fine your timelines are too long.
That doesn’t sound like the correct response though. You should just say “I predict this isn’t the reason AGI will come late, if AGI comes late”. It’s much less legible / operationalized, but if that’s what you think you know in the context, why add on extra stuff?
When somebody at least pretending to humility says, “Well, I think this here estimator is the best thing we have for anchoring a median estimate”, and I stroll over and proclaim, “Well I think that’s invalid”, I do think there is a certain justice in them demanding of me, “Well, would you at least like to say then in what direction my expectation seems to you to be predictably mistaken?”
Cotra’s model contained estimates which are as obvious BS as anchoring the size of a TRANSFORMATIVE neural net to the GENOME or the training compute to the entire evolution of life on Earth. I don’t think that I understand how Cotra even came up with these two ideas. What I do understand is how Cotra came up with the estimates like 1e31 FLOP or the lifetime anchor of 1e24 FLOP which are likely the only plausible ones in the report. As far as I understand, THESE assumptions would imply that creating the TAI is easy.
That doesn’t sound like the correct response though. You should just say “I predict this isn’t the reason AGI will come late, if AGI comes late”. It’s much less legible / operationalized, but if that’s what you think you know in the context, why add on extra stuff?
When somebody at least pretending to humility says, “Well, I think this here estimator is the best thing we have for anchoring a median estimate”, and I stroll over and proclaim, “Well I think that’s invalid”, I do think there is a certain justice in them demanding of me, “Well, would you at least like to say then in what direction my expectation seems to you to be predictably mistaken?”
Cotra’s model contained estimates which are as obvious BS as anchoring the size of a TRANSFORMATIVE neural net to the GENOME or the training compute to the entire evolution of life on Earth. I don’t think that I understand how Cotra even came up with these two ideas. What I do understand is how Cotra came up with the estimates like 1e31 FLOP or the lifetime anchor of 1e24 FLOP which are likely the only plausible ones in the report. As far as I understand, THESE assumptions would imply that creating the TAI is easy.