I tried to read Plan A, I’ll probably try again, but I find it hard to take seriously a scenario in which there are millions of human-level AIs, and in which all algorithmic progress is public, but the human race still has a choice about whether to hand over power, after ten years of that… The whole thing reads like the kind of SF in which superintelligent takeover is artificially delayed so there can be lots of human-level plot twists.
I guess you disagree about some combination of: (a) Under conditions of transparency and slowdown, with companies required to make solid safety cases etc., control-based safety cases will be made strong enough to work up until about top human expert level AI
(b) If so, alignment will be adequately solved within a couple of years?
If b is false then we’d have a similar scenario but stretched out over more years. If a is false then we’d need to pause at a lower level of capability than top expert level, whichever level is low enough that control works.
If you want control that works, I think you need to turn the clock back, before chain of thought and reasoning models. See my comment to @Vladimir_Nesov. Vladimir has a nuanced defense of his position, but I think OpenAI’s o-series (i.e. GPT-5) may have been the point of no return.
I tried to read Plan A, I’ll probably try again, but I find it hard to take seriously a scenario in which there are millions of human-level AIs, and in which all algorithmic progress is public, but the human race still has a choice about whether to hand over power, after ten years of that… The whole thing reads like the kind of SF in which superintelligent takeover is artificially delayed so there can be lots of human-level plot twists.
I guess you disagree about some combination of:
(a) Under conditions of transparency and slowdown, with companies required to make solid safety cases etc., control-based safety cases will be made strong enough to work up until about top human expert level AI
(b) If so, alignment will be adequately solved within a couple of years?
If b is false then we’d have a similar scenario but stretched out over more years.
If a is false then we’d need to pause at a lower level of capability than top expert level, whichever level is low enough that control works.
If you want control that works, I think you need to turn the clock back, before chain of thought and reasoning models. See my comment to @Vladimir_Nesov. Vladimir has a nuanced defense of his position, but I think OpenAI’s o-series (i.e. GPT-5) may have been the point of no return.