HN user

kvee

3,255 karma

Trying to solve AI alignment by accelerating neglected approaches like prosocial AI and BCI to make us smart enough to solve the problem

https://ae.studio/ai-alignment

Posts464
Comments143
View on HN
alignment.anthropic.com 13d ago

Modular Pretraining Enables Access Control

kvee
3pts0
possessedmachines.com 6mo ago

The Possessed Machines: Dostoevsky's Demons and the Coming AGI Catastrophe

kvee
3pts0
danburonline.substack.com 6mo ago

Death Is an Engineering Challenge

kvee
3pts0
www.wsj.com 6mo ago

If AI Becomes Conscious, We Need to Know

kvee
6pts11
astrocompute.dev 7mo ago

Compute in Space: a first principles interactive model

kvee
8pts0
www.cbsnews.com 9mo ago

AI threatens white-collar work, more young Americans choose blue-collar careers

kvee
3pts0
blog.amaranth.foundation 11mo ago

RFI: Neuroscience and the Path to Safe AGI

kvee
1pts0
nypost.com 12mo ago

Ending 'woke AI' isn't enough: fight the 'monster' within it

kvee
4pts3
www.sciencedaily.com 1y ago

AI-powered lab runs itself–and discovers new materials 10x faster

kvee
1pts1
phys.org 1y ago

AI finds potential antibiotics in snake and spider venom

kvee
2pts0
substack.com 1y ago

Who Is AI For, Anyway?

kvee
1pts0
time.com 1y ago

Every AI Datacenter Vulnerable to China, Report Says

kvee
3pts0
www.middleeastainews.com 1y ago

UAE Cabinet approves first-of-its-kind AI regulatory ecosystem

kvee
1pts0
www.brainpost.co 1y ago

A mathematical model of serotonin neuron activity based on RL

kvee
1pts0
davidsun.substack.com 1y ago

East Asian personality may stem from Ice Age Siberia 20000 yrs ago

kvee
48pts45
arxiv.org 1y ago

The Widespread Adoption of Large Language Model-Assisted Writing Across Society

kvee
2pts0
studyfinds.org 1y ago

Humans overtrust machines in life-or-death decisions

kvee
6pts0
decrypt.co 1y ago

OpenAI Investigating Claim of 20M Stolen User Credentials

kvee
1pts1
www.city-journal.org 1y ago

The AI Arms Race

kvee
1pts0
amcs-community.org 1y ago

Wake Up Call Letter to Accelerate Research in the Field of Consciousness Science

kvee
3pts3
rocketable.substack.com 1y ago

The Idiot Index for Software

kvee
1pts0
www.strangeloopcanon.com 1y ago

What would a world with AGI look like?

kvee
1pts0
inferencemagazine.substack.com 1y ago

AGI Is an Engineering Problem

kvee
2pts0
www.bloomberg.com 1y ago

Space Firm Loft Orbital Raises $170M to Scale Up Launches

kvee
1pts1
www.oneusefulthing.org 1y ago

What to make of the statements of the AI labs?

kvee
4pts2
phys.org 1y ago

Computational biologists develop AI that predicts inner workings of cells

kvee
3pts0
www.the-sun.com 1y ago

Cybertruck bomber 'used AI' to plan Tesla explosion

kvee
1pts2
time.com 1y ago

New Tests Reveal AI's Capacity for Deception

kvee
1pts1
www.wsj.com 1y ago

Meta Urges California Attorney General to Stop OpenAI from Becoming For-Profit

kvee
4pts2
www.scientificamerican.com 1y ago

What Are AI Agents, and Why Are They About to Be Everywhere?

kvee
3pts0

I think I can see how you interpret it that way.

I certainly didn't interpret as him disagreeing with his statement "I mean I have like lots of selfish reasons for doing this"

It's the "as you've said" part of "as you've said I get like all the power of running OpenAI" that would make me inclined to think what you wrote here.

But I do think there's a greater chance that he is saying that he does like the power.

There's also another quote either in this video or the other one I shared I think where he's asked why he's doing this, or what motivates him, or something like that, and he responds with something like "I'd be lying if I didn't say I really like the power"

Just went to the first video and got the following from 1:36, here's a link which starts at that point: https://youtu.be/3sWH2e5xpdo?si=bmum-8B02FLoVkWj&t=96

"I mean I have like lots of selfish reasons for doing this and as you've said I get like all the power of running OpenAI, but I can't think of anything more fulfilling to work on and I don't think it's particularly altruistic, it would be if I didn't already have a bunch of money, yeah, the money is gonna pile up faster than I can spend it"

Some other fascinating and relevant stuff in that video too.

Here are a couple I could find in notes I took while listening to podcasts, though there are more -

“I get like all of the power of running OpenAI” “I don’t think it’s particularly altruistic. Like it would be if I didn’t already have a bunch of money. The money is gonna pile up faster than I can spend it anyway.”

Those I think are either from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3sWH2e5xpdo or https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_hpuPi7YZX8

You may be right here.

However, there seems to be a decent amount of evidence that Sam has done exactly what you're talking about.

He manipulated and was "not consistently candid" with the board, he got all the OpenAI employees to support him in his power struggles, he made them afraid to stand up to him (https://x.com/tobyordoxford/status/1727631406178672993?s=20), he exhibited delusions (though I guess they were correct) of grandeur with pg with a glint in his eye making clear to pg that he wanted to take over yc, he did little things like made it seem that he was cool with Eliezer Yudkowsky with a photo op but didn't really chat with him, etc.

Again, I am not sure this perspective is necessarily right (and I may be convinced just because he's such an effective psychopath).

In any case, I think this is a pretty good explanation of this perspective: https://x.com/erikphoel/status/1731703696197599537?s=20

In this case I think I just mean more effective at seeming good to others.

I think they both believe they are good and doing good.

People tend to be more suspicious of Mark Zuckerberg's motives than Sam Altman's.

Sam Altman himself even said he can't be trusted but that was ok because of the company structure and then, when he needed to, overpowered that structure he claimed was necessary: https://x.com/tobyordoxford/status/1727624526450581571?s=20

pg talks about how Sam Altman is the most powered person he's ever met. Seems we have a super powerful psychopath running perhaps the most important company in human history.

I do think he legitimately believes he's doing the right thing though all throughout, which maybe makes it more scary.

Sorta like how Mark Zuckerberg seemed to truly believe in Facebook's mission and wound up having all sorts of negative externalities for the world. Mark Zuckerberg just isn't quite as effective as Sam Altman, and it's easier to be suspicious of his motives.

Not to say that psychopaths are necessarily bad. Peter in Ender's Shadow turned out great!

But it does seem dangerous for 1 person to hold so much power over the future of humanity.

Sam Altman's reasoning for him having all the power, I think, is that “short timelines and slow takeoff is likely the safest quadrant of the short/long timelines and slow/fast takeoff matrix.”

If you believe that and believe that Sam Altman having complete control of OpenAI is the best way to accomplish that, everything seems fine.

I'd personally have preferred trying to optimize for long timelines and a slow takeoff too, which I think might have been doable if we'd devoted more resources to neglected approaches to AI alignment–like enhancing human capabilities with BCI and other stuff like that.

If of interest to anyone here, my company has built an open source software library for transcranial focused ultrasound stimulation: https://github.com/agencyenterprise/neurotechdevkit

Its goal is to accelerate the development of agency-increasing neurotechnology and lower the barrier of entry for any developers to be able to solve open problems in neurotech without having to have their own hardware or human subjects. It's starting with ultrasound, which we find quite promising, and we hope to expand in the future to other areas as well.

I suspect treating screen use as "treats" may not be ideal.

I also have a 2 year old son and am very curious about this.

It's tough, because I do know whatever I do won't be ideal, and we won't know till later when we learn more about how our brains work what we really should be doing with regards to screen use by kids.

And, at the same time, things are accelerating fast, so there's a decent chance tech is totally different by the time our children are in high school, or even elementary school.

I think that in an ideal world, we'd all use technology all the time and it'd be a natural extension of ourselves letting us be fuller versions of ourselves and more present with each other. It's a shame we're not in that world yet, and I'm hopeful that as we get richer humanity starts designing tech to be more agency increasing with this target in mind rather than losing agency to shorter term incentives.

With our 2 year old, I think the highest impact thing we do is try to strict about being present with him and not on our phones. I suspect this might be much more important than whatever rules are established for a child's own use of technology.

Reminds me of the pretty compelling poem "Children Learn What They Live": https://www.freepoemsonline.net/poems-htm/children1.htm

When NFTs were hot, we made one that was intentionally tasteless thinking that it could raise awareness for people to donate to effective charities (pretending it was NFTs for needy children, but actually the proceeds from NFTs would go to the Against Malaria Foundation), but never could really get the whole thing right so decided not to launch it.

If anyone has an idea to actually execute that original idea right and do some good net net, here's the website: https://nftsforstarvingchildren.com/

I think the best thing is to do more research to understand more rather than rejecting the scientific method entirely. It has and will continue to get better and better over time, with occasional regressions that may seem meaningful in the short term but are tiny blips when you zoom out. The history of science is one false theory being replaced by another that’s (usually) marginally closer to the truth.

"Brokerage customers who opt in to the brokerage cash sweep program (the IntraFiNetwork Deposit (IND) Sweep Service), will have their uninvested brokerage account cash automatically “swept” or moved into deposits at a network of program banks. There are currently six program banks that participate in our brokerage cash sweep program. Cash deposited to these banks will be eligible for FDIC insurance up to a total maximum of up to $1.5 million (up to $250,000 per program bank, inclusive of deposits you may already hold at the bank in the same ownership capacity). While the FDIC insurance coverage limit at each bank is $250,000, $2,000 is reserved for accrued interest."

-https://robinhood.com/us/en/support/articles/deposit-sweep-p...

For the record, that's not what the article is saying.

A better TL;DR might be:

There's a success sequence which makes people not be poor (97% effective) regardless of IQ. Elites hide this sequence from the masses perhaps because they believe it will make more people blame people for being poor. The article argues that the success sequence is easy enough that substantially more people would complete it and live better lives if they were made aware of it, and especially if it were tied more to social status rather than other things being tied to social status which decrease their probability of success in life.