Opinions expressed are my own and not endorsed by anyone. Currently working at ARC Evals.
Curious what industry this is if you don’t mind saying
Good point. I am concerned that adding even a dash of legibility screws the work over completely and immediately and invisibly rather than incrementally. I may have over-analyzed my data so I should probably return to the field to collect more samples.
Excellent points all around. I did have more varied examples of smart looks dumb and dumb looks smart (research, advice, peers, family, subordinates...) but cut them cuz I don’t like throwing too much shade and they were hollow without details. Perhaps the reader can supplement?
I can’t think of a good argument against strategizing. Maybe that’s like trying to end a fist fight with your fists or maybe I’m wrong. Let me substitute with some pithy indulgence?: The law of bad strategy attractors: strategizing will make your strategy worse (overly legible etc) , especially if you try to account for TLOBSA.
Work dumber not smarter
Could spaceships accelerate fast enough to make missile course adjustment necessary? Seems like blind missile could still hit
[Question] When should I close the fridge?
I would read a longpost about where and how and when and why liability insurance has succeeded or failed
Liability insurance has a mixed record for sure. Landlords and doctors ok not great in terms of safety
This is so goddamn strange. I have wondered about this for so long
Some things are easy to notice and hard to replicate
More ideas you’re less confident in?
I should clarify that section. I meant that if you’re asked to write a line of code or an app or whatever then it is easier to guess at intent/consequences for the higher level tasks. Another example: the lab manager has a better idea of what’s going on than a lab assistant.
Distinguishing misuse is difficult and uncomfortable
How much room is there in algorithmic improvements?
Yeah would love to see experiments/evidence outside of Bing
Ctrl-f for “memory” has no results
Indeed, AI labs should sell products and services instead of model access
Do you think there might be a simple difference between the successes and failures here that we could learn from?
Added footnote clarifying link (goodfirms seems misquoted and also kind of looks fake?)
I mentioned the software development firm as an intermediate step to products because it’s less risky / easier than making a successful product. Even easier would just be to hire devs, give them your model, put them on upwork, and split the profits.
I suppose the ideal commercialization plan depends on how the model works and the size of the firm commercializing it. (And for govts and universities “commercialization” is completely different.)
Of course ReLU is great!! I was trying to say that if I were a 2009 ANN researcher (unaware of prior ReLU uses like most people probably were at the time) and someone (who had not otherwise demonstrated expertise) came in and asked why we use this particular woosh instead of a bent line or something, then I would’ve thoroughly explained the thought out of them. It’s possible that I would’ve realized how it works but very unlikely IMO. But a dumbworker more likely to say “Go do it. Now. Go. Do it now. Leave. Do it.” as I see it.