This is thoughtful and should indeed go beyond AI risk (to bio, etc).
Employees should have protected ways of disclosing unsafe practices, particularly when the potential impacts are so large.
233 karma · joined December 1, 2014
Employees should have protected ways of disclosing unsafe practices, particularly when the potential impacts are so large.
It is extraordinarily difficult to do correctly, and once your brain has adapted to the Apple acoustic transformations, they’ve achieved near-indistinguishability.
The problem is usually the opposite (sycophancy)
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/75240915/is-it-possible-...
I'm not sure if there is a against this, but it feels kinda against the spirit of posting a title like this when it seems like the goal of the linked page is 20% to communicate the topic of the headline and 80% to drive you to other topics they have been posting about.
The slack convo leak would have been the same either way.
It really has a strong smell of protect-my-ego.
https://questgiver.org/t/05c0a7d7-5f22-41d2-90aa-f02082fbb8d...
These were entirely generated based on an intro prompt + “Make three quests people could do to help ensure ethical AI development”. It generated a json with objective types, emojis, everything.
We’re planning to use it to get past the “blank page” problem when onboarding organizations.
I haven't spent much time learning about how ChatGPT works, but:
'ChatGPT does not simply output the “most semantically popular result”. That description applies only to the base model, before instruction tuning and RLHF.'
was exactly the explanation I needed!
They will be looking towards groups like the Linux Foundation to own the license once developed.
(Site has been overwhelmed with traffic, thus archive.org)
Too many folks using the media hubbub on inflation, economic ‘predictions’, etc as memetic cover for greed-based maneuvering.
It pops up on the top of the screen every time you open the game.
They were very cagy about it, but their excuse seemed to be that it was up to the game publisher whether to include it, and that I should complain to them (even though it was sent as an Apple Arcade notification).
Those are real, important issues to be worked through, and to your point, and they are better served by a multi-stakeholder approach that values climate justice.
There is research and work needed both on policy and the technology aspects of this.
However, you aren’t being “edgy” or “bold”, you are being unwise.
This is not a place to shoot from the hip.
Rationalizing from science fiction, has serious failure-modes, and your approach risks poisoning public support for an important climate intervention.
If you want to do right by this, you need to steelman the scientists critical of your work. Reflect back to them the best version of their argument until they agree that you understand it.
Many folks who smoke know the dangers, but don’t know how to quit, or fear being miserable.
I’d highly recommend offering a book from https://www.allencarr.com/
They might not read it for a few years, but when they do, it’s the best way to quit.
Right now it is very difficult for people to figure out good ways to help causes they care about. Whether in big ways, like career shifts, or small ways, like writing a letter on behalf of a divestment initiative.
(This is a biased answer since I am working on this)
Async stuff is interesting to see