I really like learning new things!
Jacob G-W
Karma: 523
I made a manifold market for if this will replicate: https://manifold.markets/g_w1/will-george3d6s-increasing-iq-is-tr I’m not really sure what the resolution criteria should be, so I just made some that sounded reasonable, but feel free to give suggestions.
A question I have for the subjects in the experimental group:
Do they feel any different? Surely being +0.67 std will make someone feel different. Do they feel faster, smoother, or really anything different? Both physically and especially mentally? I’m curious if this is just helping for the IQ test or if they can notice (not rigorously ofc) a difference in their life. Of course, this could be placebo, but it would still be interesting, especially if they work at a cognitively demanding job (like are they doing work faster/better?).
Here’s a market if you want to predict if this will replicate: https://manifold.markets/g_w1/will-george3d6s-increasing-iq-is-tr
@lsusr recently did a video about this. Interestingly, he thought that the hardest people to love were not actually the Hitler type (they are still hard), but the people that you are actively hurting.
Sure, but they only use 16 frames, which doesn’t really seem like it’s “video” to me.
Understanding video input is an important step towards a useful generalist agent. We measure the video understanding capability across several established benchmarks that are held-out from training. These tasks measure whether the model is able to understand and reason over a temporally-related sequence of frames. For each video task, we sample 16 equally-spaced frames from each video clip and feed them to the Gemini models. For the YouTube video datasets (all datasets except NextQA and the Perception test), we evaluate the Gemini models on videos that were still publicly available in the month of November, 2023
I think the idea actually works pretty well with superintelligence (with one big exception if you assume we all die). Lots of people don’t understand how/why superintelligence could kill us all. They naively think that creating a superintelligence would be a great idea. If we all died, then they would understand why alignment is a necessary complexity. The only problem with this is that we are all dead.
Do you think this is permanent? Or will you have to keep up all of the interventions for it to stay +13points indefinitely?
This makes sense. I’ve changed my mind, thanks!
It seems to do something similar to Gato where everything is just serialized into tokens, which is pretty cool
I wonder if they are just doing a standard transformer for everything, or doing some sort of diffusion model for the images inside the model?
Update, it seems that the video generation capability is just accomplished by feeding still frames of the video into the model, not by any native video generation.
Hey, I’m new here and have really been enjoying reading lots of posts on here. My views have certainly updated on a variety of things!
I’ve been exploring using Anki flashcards to codify my thought processes when I have a-ha moments. After reading about cached thoughts, I started thinking that most of executing procedural knowledge is just having lots of cached thoughts about what to do next. I understand that this is not exactly the type of cached thought in the post, but I think it is interesting nonetheless. I have been making Anki cards like
Physics: what should you do if you get something as a function of x instead of a function of t to solve a problem//use conservation of energy insteadto speed up the process of learning new procedures (like solving physics problems).Have others done something similar?
Could you not just replace “I believe in” with “I value”? What would be different about the meaning? If I value something, I would also invest in it. What am I not seeing?
Thank you for writing this! It expresses in a clear way a pattern that I’ve seen in myself: I eagerly jump into contrarian ideas because it feels “good” and then slowly get out of them as I start to realize they are not true.
I’d be interested in what a steelman of “have teachers arbitrarily grade the kids then use that to decide life outcomes” could be?
The best argument I have thought of is that America loves liberty and hates centralized control. They want to give individual states, districts, schools, teachers the most power they can have as that is a central part of America’s philosophy. Also anecdotally, some teachers have said that they hate standardized tests because they have to teach to it. And I hate being taught to for the test (like APs for example). It’s much more interesting where the teacher is teaching something they find interesting and enjoy (and thus can choose to assess on).
However, this probably does not outweigh the downsides and is probably a bad approach overall.
It has been 15 days. Any updates? (sorry if this seems a bit rude; but I’m just really curious :))
Thank you for this post!
After reading this, it seems blindingly obvious: why should you wait for one of your plans to fail before trying another one of them?
This past summer, I was running a study on study on humans that I had to finish before the end of the summer. I had in mind two methods for finding participants; one would be better and more impressive and also much less likely to work, while the other would be easier but less impressive.
For a few weeks, I tried really hard to get the first method to work. I sent over 30 emails and used personal connections to try to collect data. But it didn’t work. So I did the thing that I thought to be “rational” at the time. I gave up and I sent my website out to some people who I thought would be very likely to do it. Sure enough, they did.
At the time, I thought I was being super-duper rational for allowing my first method to fail (not deluding myself that it would work and thus not collecting any data) and then quickly switching to the other method.
However, after reading this post, I realize that I still made a big mistake! I should have sent it out to as many people as possible all at once. This would have been a bit more work since I would have to deal with more people and they would use a slightly different structure, but I was not time constrained. I was subject constrained.
I’m going to instill this pattern in my mind and will use it when I do something that I think has a decent chance of failing (as my first method did).
Given that a podcast already exists, I think you might get more bang for your buck if you did some animation on top of it. Otherwise, the only thing you are adding is putting it on youtube and having a camera of your face. This would probably be (much) harder, but also probably much higher reward if it worked.
Maybe a collaboration with rationalanimations would help? Not really sure, but good luck if you try to do this!
Same!
There’s a bunch. Here’s one: https://manifold.markets/NealShrestha58d3/sam-altman-will-return-to-openai-by
I really enjoyed this post. Thank you for writing it!
I also have no clue what is going to happen. I predict that it will be wild, and I also predict that it will happen in <=10 years. Let’s fight for the future we want!