Thanks for these clarifications. I didn’t realize that the 30% was for the new yellow-line evals rather than the current ones.
That’s how I was thinking about the predictions that I was making; others might have been thinking about the current evals where those were more stable.
I’m having trouble parsing this sentence. What you mean by “doing so only risks the costs of pausing when we could have instead prepared mitigations or better evals”? Doesn’t pausing include focusing on mitigations and evals?
Of course, but pausing also means we’d have to shuffle people around, interrupt other projects, and deal with a lot of other disruption (the costs of pausing). Ideally, we’d continue updating our yellow-line evals to stay ahead of model capabilities until mitigations are ready.
That’s how I was thinking about the predictions that I was making; others might have been thinking about the current evals where those were more stable.
Of course, but pausing also means we’d have to shuffle people around, interrupt other projects, and deal with a lot of other disruption (the costs of pausing). Ideally, we’d continue updating our yellow-line evals to stay ahead of model capabilities until mitigations are ready.