Mind First
3.9K posts
@mind_first
Building a community of people and research to understand and engineer better mindware—both human and AI. 501(c)3 NFP. See also: @RADVACproject
around Boston on Fri? come say hi /talk posthumanism/ eat good free food w/me :) the microsoft NERD center is having a smaller AI event (free), and as it turns out, Worthy Successor is the theme its not put on by me/my people but it is put on by smart folks/will be fun
1/6 ~100 people jammed into a sea cliff SF mansion discussing posthuman AGI. guest list isn't public (unicorn founders, agi twitter anons, agi lab folks, agi gov leaders), but the speakers are public :) here's what happened at the first-ever Worthy Successor event on Sunday:
AI Reasoning Virtual Shootout, Humans vs AI SERIES OVERVIEW: The Mind First Foundation has been very actively testing various AI models, including cloud-based frontier models as well as those small enough to be run locally. In order to make this engaging and fun, we will be posting a few queries each day followed by answers the next day. See how you do against various AI models! RATIONALE FOR THIS SERIES: AI models are typically tested across a range of benchmarks assessing abilities in math and coding, following instructions, and levels of expert knowledge in challenging STEM domains. Since these evaluation areas are well covered by others, we have focused on elementary reasoning and language comprehension, and we attempt to disentangle these to some degree from rote memorization, brute force exploration, and knowledge regurgitation. This has led us to create a set of queries that assess and reveal the limits of the abilities of both people and machines, wherein the answers can be understood by the average non-supergenius human. These tests help to get an intuitive sense (a vibe) of how smart these models really are relative to people, and allow you to experience the challenge. KEY POINT: Some of our queries are new variations on classic logic puzzles, wherein the answer to the classic puzzle is the wrong answer to the new variant. See how current frontier models perform on these queries (and please feel free to reply with variations of other classic brain teasers and simple logic puzzles). In this series we will post such pairs of classic (v1) queries and newly created (v2) queries, and show how frontier models score on these queries. A check mark (✓) indicates a correct answer and a minus sign (-) indicates an incorrect answer.
AI Reasoning Virtual Shootout, Humans vs AI SERIES OVERVIEW: The Mind First Foundation has been very actively testing various AI models, including cloud-based frontier models as well as those small enough to be run locally. In order to make this engaging and fun, we will be posting a few queries each day followed by answers the next day. See how you do against various AI models! RATIONALE FOR THIS SERIES: AI models are typically tested across a range of benchmarks assessing abilities in math and coding, following instructions, and levels of expert knowledge in challenging STEM domains. Since these evaluation areas are well covered by others, we have focused on elementary reasoning and language comprehension, and we attempt to disentangle these to some degree from rote memorization, brute force exploration, and knowledge regurgitation. This has led us to create a set of queries that assess and reveal the limits of the abilities of both people and machines, wherein the answers can be understood by the average non-supergenius human. These tests help to get an intuitive sense (a vibe) of how smart these models really are relative to people, and allow you to experience the challenge. KEY POINT: Some of our queries are new variations on classic logic puzzles, wherein the answer to the classic puzzle is the wrong answer to the new variant. See how current frontier models perform on these queries (and please feel free to reply with variations of other classic brain teasers and simple logic puzzles). In this series we will post such pairs of classic (v1) queries and newly created (v2) queries, and show how frontier models score on these queries. A check mark (✓) indicates a correct answer and a minus sign (-) indicates an incorrect answer.
To everyone interested in open access science, and in the acceleration of biomedical research and cures for disease, please spread the following message. Attention philanthropists: you have a unique and fleeting opportunity to establish the largest publicly available genetic and biomedical dataset in the world, and to greatly accelerate the race to cures for many diseases. The data belong to the company 23andMe. CEO Anne Wojcicki, and a private equity group, New Mountain Capital, are proposing to take the company private, along with genetic and other data of 14+ million customers (about 11M of whom have accompanying trait/biomedical survey data). There is enormous unrealized value in the 23andMe data and making it publicly available/open access would represent an unprecedented contribution to biomedical research; but, again, time is of the essence. On January 28 the company announced that they were open to acquisition, and then on Friday, February 22nd the offer from New Mountain Capital was announced. The proposal awaits review and a vote by the three members of the 23andMe board of directors. The current $74.7M offer to take 23andMe private assigns a value of just over $5 per customer dataset. In contrast, I estimate that costs to acquire, analyze, report, and store all customers genetic and other data exceed $1 billion. Even if newer and superior methods for DNA analysis were employed, sample acquisition and data storage costs alone would be substantially in excess of the current offer for the company. The kind of data held by 23andMe are still widely used and valuable, especially if the number of datasets is in the millions. These data would provide a starting foundation for building a biomedical discovery infrastructure of enormous and unparalleled value. A visionary and compassionate philanthropist should acquire 23andMe and make as much of the data publicly available as possible. Here is one possible model: existing 23andMe customers could be re-consented, ideally for public sharing/open access of their genetic and phenotype data. The data of those who do not consent to public sharing could still be used for research, and access to these data could be managed through an application process, similar to the UK BioBank model. Free and open access to even 10% of the 23andMe data would establish the largest such dataset in the world, which would be a game changer in biomedical research, helping to accelerate cures for many diseases. Please DM @PrestonWEstep if you have a serious interest; I am happy to contribute to a detailed analysis and proposal.
