jacobjacob

Karma: 6,158

jacobjacob 19 Apr 2024 8:45 UTC
15 points
2
on: Express interest in an “FHI of the West”
Noting that a nicer name that’s just waiting to be had, in this context, is “Future of the Lightcone Institute” :)

jacobjacob 18 Apr 2024 9:17 UTC
16 points
1
in reply to: Jan_Kulveit’s comment on: Express interest in an “FHI of the West”
Two notes:
1. I think the title is a somewhat obscure pun referencing the old saying that Stanford was the “Harvard of the West”. If one is not familiar with that saying, I guess some of the nuance is lost in the choice of term. (I personally had never heard that saying before recently, and I’m not even quite sure I’m referencing the right “X of the West” pun)
2. habryka did have a call with Nick Bostrom a few weeks back, to discuss his idea for an “FHI of the West”, and I’m quite confident he referred to it with that phrase on the call, too. Far as I’m aware Nick didn’t particularly react to it with more than a bit humor.

jacobjacob 6 Mar 2024 20:17 UTC
4 points
0
on: Does anyone know good essays on how different AI timelines will affect asset prices?
See this: https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/CTBta9i8sav7tjC2r/how-to-hopefully-ethically-make-money-off-of-agi

jacobjacob 2 Mar 2024 4:48 UTC
12 points
0
in reply to: George3d6’s comment on: Increasing IQ is trivial
Can you CC me too?
I work from the same office as John; and the location also happens to have dozens of LessWrong readers work there on a regular basis. We could probably set up an experiment here with many willing volunteers; and I’m interested in helping to make it happen (if it continues to seem promising after thinking more about it).

jacobjacob 5 Feb 2024 19:24 UTC
2 points
in reply to: Tracey Foster’s comment on: Something to Protect
[Mod note: I edited out your email from the comment, to save you from getting spam email and similar. If you really want it there, feel free to add it back! :) ]

jacobjacob 5 Feb 2024 19:08 UTC
11 points
0
in reply to: Malentropic Gizmo’s comment on: Brute Force Manufactured Consensus is Hiding the Crime of the Century
Mod here: most of the team were away over the weekend so we just didn’t get around to processing this for personal vs frontpage yet. (All posts start as personal until approved to frontpage.) About to make a decision in this morning’s moderation review session, as we do for all other new posts.

jacobjacob 22 Jan 2024 15:09 UTC
2 points
2
on: Deliberate Dysentery: Q&A about Human Challenge Trials
Jake himself has participated in both Zika and Shigella challenge trials.
Your civilisation thanks you 🫡

[Question] What does it look like for AI to significantly improve human coordination, before superintelligence?

jacobjacob15 Jan 2024 19:22 UTC

22 points

2 comments1 min readLW link

jacobjacob 10 Jan 2024 0:37 UTC
3 points
0
on: Announcing the Double Crux Bot
Cool idea and congrats on shipping! Installed it now and am trying it. One user feedback is I found the having-to-wait for replies a bit frictiony. Maybe you could stream responses in chunks? (I did for a gpt-to-slack app once. You just can’t do letter-by-letter because you’ll be rate limited).

jacobjacob 7 Jan 2024 20:33 UTC
2 points
0
in reply to: Bruce W. Lee’s comment on: Benchmark Study #3: HellaSwag
If that’s your belief, I think you should edit in a disclaimer to your TL;DR section, like “Gemini and GPT-4 authors report results close to or matching human performance at 95%, though I don’t trust their methodology”.
Also, the numbers aren’t “non-provable”: anyone could just replicate them with the GPT-4 API! (Modulo dataset contamination considerations.)

jacobjacob 7 Jan 2024 17:49 UTC
2 points
0
on: Benchmark Study #3: HellaSwag
Humans achieve over 95% accuracy, while no model surpasses 50% accuracy. (2019)

A series on benchmarks does seem very interesting and useful—but you really gotta report more recent model results than from 2019!! GPT-4 allegedly surpasses 95.3% on HellaSwag, making that initial claim in the post very misleading.

jacobjacob 7 Jan 2024 17:23 UTC
4 points
0
in reply to: bhauth’s comment on: Announcing Dialogues
Ah! I investigated and realise what the bug is. (Currently, only the single dialogue main author can archive it, not the other authors.) Will fix!

jacobjacob 7 Jan 2024 1:30 UTC
2 points
0
in reply to: bhauth’s comment on: Announcing Dialogues
You can go to your profile page and press the “Archive” icon, that appears when hovering to the right of a dialogue.

jacobjacob 22 Dec 2023 5:34 UTC
4 points
2
in reply to: Nathan Helm-Burger’s comment on: How do you feel about LessWrong these days? [Open feedback thread]
Yeah, I’m interested in features in this space!
Another idea is to implement a similar algorithm to Twitter’s community votes: identify comments that have gotten upvotes by people who usually disagree with each other, and highlight those.

jacobjacob 18 Dec 2023 20:42 UTC
2 points
0
in reply to: Zach Stein-Perlman’s comment on: OpenAI: Preparedness framework
Oops, somehow didn’t see there was actually a market baked into your question
~~I’d also be interested in “Will there be a publicly revealed instance of a pause in either deployment or development, as a result of a model scoring High or Critical on a scorecard, by Date X?”~~

jacobjacob 18 Dec 2023 20:30 UTC
7 points
0
on: OpenAI: Preparedness framework
Made a Manifold market

Might make more later, and would welcome others to do the same! (I think one could ask more interesting questions than the one I asked above.)

jacobjacob 15 Dec 2023 18:57 UTC
4 points
0
in reply to: emiddell’s comment on: Mapping the semantic void: Strange goings-on in GPT embedding spaces
Heads up, we support latex :)
Use Ctrl-4 to open the LaTex prompt (or Cmd-4 if you’re on a Mac). Open a centred LaTex popup using Ctrl-M (aka Cmd-M). If you’ve written some maths in normal writing and want to turn it into LaTex, if you highlight the text and then hit the LaTex editor button it will turn straight into LaTex.
https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/xWrihbjp2a46KBTDe/editor-mini-guide

jacobjacob 13 Dec 2023 2:59 UTC
22 points
12
in reply to: TurnTrout’s comment on: How do you feel about LessWrong these days? [Open feedback thread]
I feel pretty frustrated at how rarely people actually bet or make quantitative predictions about existential risk from AI.
Without commenting on how often people do or don’t bet, I think overall betting is great and I’d love to see more it!
I’m also excited how much of it I’ve seen since Manifold started gaining traction. So I’d like to give a shout out to LessWrong users who are active on Manifold, in particular on AI questions. Some I’ve seen are:
Rob Bensinger
Jonas Vollmer
Arthur Conmy
Jaime Sevilla Molina
Isaac King
Eliezer Yudkowsky
Noa Nabeshima
Mikhail Samin
Daniel Filan
Daniel Kokotajlo
Zvi
Eli Tyre
Ben Pace
Allison Duettmann
Matthew Barnett
Peter Barnett
Joe Brenton
Austin Chen
lc
Good job everyone for betting on your beliefs :)
There are definitely more folks than this: feel free to mention more folks in the comments who you want to give kudos to (though please don’t dox anyone who’s name on either platforms is pseudonymous and doesn’t match the other).

jacobjacob 11 Dec 2023 19:03 UTC
4 points
0
in reply to: Brendan Long’s comment on: How do you feel about LessWrong these days? [Open feedback thread]
LLM summaries aren’t yet non-hallucinatory enough that we’ve felt comfortable putting them on the site, but we have run some internal experiments on this.

jacobjacob 11 Dec 2023 18:58 UTC
2 points
0
in reply to: Adam Zerner’s comment on: How do you feel about LessWrong these days? [Open feedback thread]
Yep. Will set myself a reminder for 6 months from now!

jacobjacob

[Question] What does it look like for AI to sig­nifi­cantly im­prove hu­man co­or­di­na­tion, be­fore su­per­in­tel­li­gence?

[Question] What does it look like for AI to significantly improve human coordination, before superintelligence?