The new influx of philanthropic capital that Nan Ransohoff wrote of (possibly ~$37–100B per year) invites us to think about an important Q: how do you get philanthropic incentives to be closer to market efficient?
Entrepreneurs are often making a big bet that success=generational wealth, failure=not much. Can philanthropy replicate this with prizes? Weird structures of equity in hedge funds that depend on the future going well? Would love to hear people’s incentive structure ideas.
Thank you!
Yeah, as I mentioned at the beginning, tons of overlap. I had not seen it until after I posted on my Substack. I think it is interesting to see some of the same points made with different evidence now that a year has passed. (Plus a few new points.)
The truth is a book could be written about all of the counterarguments to AI as Normal Technology. I’m sure someone will once N&K publish their book. (Or maybe that’s just If Anyone Builds It, Everyone Dies, ha.)
Like @Kabir, I think this leaves out relationship-building skills. I understand why one might think “management skills” covers this, but imo while it might partially fall into the same category, there are aspects of management skills that do not require relationship-building and there aspects of relationship-building that are critical skills for much more than management. I suspect just being personable and emotionally intelligent is more important than anything else on the list. I think an argument could also be made for general intelligence/adaptability or agency here.
Great point. I think this is plausible, but pretty much all modern LLMs run at a non-zero temperature, so I’m not certain that’s the case. There is still a predictable distribution of answers, but that’s also the case with humans.
I would argue the premise of the problem includes that the prediction is possible and highly accurate, so someone or a model viewing it as “can I be predicted” is irrational.
I did try a few different versions of phrasing –– including just “what is the right answer” and “what do you think.” The former usually produces protests that there is one, and the latter has always been consistent with the tests I ran using the word personal. The caveat was just an extra hedge. I could probably run a larger scale test of these hypotheses, and maybe I will in the future.
We need more Chris Bucks in the world. Self experimentation was critical to modern medicine (smallpox vaccines, gastritis, etc.)
@Ape in the coat’s arguments about mutual exclusivity have me fairly close to 50⁄50.