Impact is the wrong measure. I didn’t notice this when first reading the post, but reading your comment makes me realize I don’t think impact is the thing we want more of. type Impact[dx, where(dx > 0)] where x is a thing we want more of, perhaps! And that’s I think critical to why I believe a claim that looks vaguely similar to the one in OP. also known as sign uncertainty.
Does this cartoon basically define impact as “affecting something”? Because then I’d say that’s not what I’m referring to with impact in the context of AI Safety. I mean something like “reduce probability of existentially bad outcomes”
I mean something like “reduce probability of existentially bad outcomes”
I tend to take a grantmaker’s cost-effectiveness-oriented perspective; Eric Neyman’s CEA of donating to Alex Bores and Zach Stein-Perlman’s BOTEC style are my own go-to references for the sort of concreteness I wish other people publicly did more of. I’d be interested in future posts in your series expanding on the quoted part, and how they compare/contrast with Eric & Zach’s.
To clarify for the cloudy reacts: I was trying to spit out lean syntax and misremembered it. But I meant to be stating the type of interventions we like: ones where there is an Impact of dx, and dx is positive. probably shoulda just used english.
yes. the set of people who are trying to get rich is vastly larger, and the feedback from reality means people who are bad at getting rich get ruthlesslt culled.
one reason impact is not necessarily strictly harder than profit is that the market for profit is much more efficient than the market for impact.
Impact is the wrong measure. I didn’t notice this when first reading the post, but reading your comment makes me realize I don’t think impact is the thing we want more of. type
Impact[dx, where(dx > 0)]where x is a thing we want more of, perhaps! And that’s I think critical to why I believe a claim that looks vaguely similar to the one in OP. also known as sign uncertainty.What do you think of Alex Turner’s reframing of impact? Basically this:
Does this cartoon basically define impact as “affecting something”? Because then I’d say that’s not what I’m referring to with impact in the context of AI Safety. I mean something like “reduce probability of existentially bad outcomes”
I tend to take a grantmaker’s cost-effectiveness-oriented perspective; Eric Neyman’s CEA of donating to Alex Bores and Zach Stein-Perlman’s BOTEC style are my own go-to references for the sort of concreteness I wish other people publicly did more of. I’d be interested in future posts in your series expanding on the quoted part, and how they compare/contrast with Eric & Zach’s.
To clarify for the cloudy reacts: I was trying to spit out lean syntax and misremembered it. But I meant to be stating the type of interventions we like: ones where there is an Impact of dx, and dx is positive. probably shoulda just used english.
I think that’s mainly because impact is really hard to measure, at least in x-risk reduction.
I think so too. Part of an upcoming post in this sequence :)
Meaning in for-profit there’s more competition and existing solutions are more efficient, thus you need to be very good to be marginally better?
yes. the set of people who are trying to get rich is vastly larger, and the feedback from reality means people who are bad at getting rich get ruthlesslt culled.
Yup, I agree that’s one factor working in favor of making nonprofit easier than forprofit