Jacob Drori

81 posts

Jacob Drori

Jacob Drori

@jacobcd52

nyc Katılım Mayıs 2014
80 Takip Edilen69 Takipçiler
Jacob Drori
Jacob Drori@jacobcd52·
@RatOrthodox Claude seems pretty deeply nice to me. Unless by "deep" you mean like "making it non-nice would require a ton of FLOPs"
English
1
0
0
44
Brangus🔍⏹️
Brangus🔍⏹️@RatOrthodox·
"Look at this phd student. He always seems to be trying to do the things I ask him to. Very task aligned. I'm sure it would be perfectly fine to make their brain 10,000X bigger and faster in a way nobody understands, and then give them access to everyone's computers."
English
2
10
269
18.8K
Jacob Drori
Jacob Drori@jacobcd52·
@RatOrthodox > if pertaining had reliably led to the creation of seemingly nice minds somehow wo any RL or fine-tuning Huh. I think it's striking how little finetuning is required to elicit a "nice mind". or maybe you don't think current LLMs are "nice"?
English
1
0
0
52
Brangus🔍⏹️
Brangus🔍⏹️@RatOrthodox·
Sure! If you could give me a readable python program that has the same io behavior as a 9B model; if you could show me a new way for humanity to coordinate and build a field of common knowledge generation around an extremely low feedback domain; if I saw that we had paused for a decade or so and then spent a lot of our civ's resources working on the problem; if I saw that we were investing a lot in human intelligence enhancement specifically to work on the alignment problem; if pertaining had reliably led to the creation of seemingly nice minds somehow wo any RL or fine-tuning. And many more to be honest. Mostly the things that would convince me however are not concrete observations of this kind because the main concrete observation I would like to make is seeing an ASI around and seeing that it is aligned and not killing anybody. The problem with this is that you cannot get it wrong even once to gather such observations, so yes, this is a uniquely difficult problem to get empirical evidence about, and that makes us much much much more fucked, not less. But the main things that would convince me are basically arguments. Show me that P(aligned):P(not aligned) * P(aligned | used technique x):P(not aligned | used technique x) is high, and I will immediately start extremely loudly advocating for scaling and using technique x.
English
1
0
5
118
Jacob Drori
Jacob Drori@jacobcd52·
@liron @Alien_AV @RabbiMivasair I'm confused, could you clarify whether "resulting mental image" refers to your own mental image or to mine? If yours: it's hard to extract any lesson from what you said because I can't read your mind. If mine: I am spooked because apparently you can read my mind.
English
0
0
0
13
Liron Shapira
Liron Shapira@liron·
@jacobcd52 @Alien_AV @RabbiMivasair When I say “shot a 5 year old to death”, the resulting mental image is completely inconsistent with something the IDF has ever done. Let that be a lesson to you.
English
1
0
0
20
Rabbi David Mivasair
Rabbi David Mivasair@RabbiMivasair·
Translated from Hebrew: Are you okay that we live in a society where I can go to the supermarket right now, start putting tomatoes in a bag, and next to me in the cucumbers there'll be a guy who shot a 5-year-old to death? Or go to the bank and the person in front of me in line dropped a bomb on a building and killed everyone who lived in it? Or go to a clinic and be treated by a doctor who just came back from reserves in a torture camp? How can you live as if everything is normal? Israel must be stopped because it is not going to stop by itself.
fabfag@fabfag31

אתם בסדר עם זה שאנחנו חיים בחברה שבה אני יכול ללכת עכשיו לסופר, להתחיל להכניס עגבניות לשקית, ולידי במלפפונים יהיה אדם שירה בילד בן 5 למוות? או ללכת לבנק והאדם שלפניי בתור הפיל פצצה על בניין והרג את כל מי שגר בו?

English
166
5.1K
22.2K
701.4K
Jacob Drori
Jacob Drori@jacobcd52·
@liron @Alien_AV @RabbiMivasair I didn't realize you were drawing a deliberate distinction between shot vs bombed, so the numbers I gave above don't directly address your original statement. My bad. That said, my prior is that more Palestinian children are killed by gunshot. Prove me wrong?
English
1
0
0
23
Jacob Drori
Jacob Drori@jacobcd52·
@RatOrthodox are there any pre-ASI observations that would make you much more optimistic about ASI alignment?
English
1
0
1
93
Brangus🔍⏹️
Brangus🔍⏹️@RatOrthodox·
"What that's crazy? You have no clue what his preference ordering over world states will be?" "What do you mean? When I ask him whether he likes democracy he says yes, in fact he is generally very good at answering ethical questions to my ideology's satisfaction. It'll be fine"
English
1
0
60
1.4K
Jacob Drori
Jacob Drori@jacobcd52·
@Alien_AV @liron @RabbiMivasair > TBH I don't believe in giving Oct 7 a preferential treatment in this case Yeah I just look at post oct 7 stats since they were easy to google. Do you predict the conclusion would change significantly if we looked further back?
English
0
0
0
16
Jacob Drori
Jacob Drori@jacobcd52·
@Alien_AV @liron @RabbiMivasair A few dead babies could be an accident, but several hundred? The IDF surely knows roughly how many babies a given airstrike will kill (it's been doing this long enough to establish base rates) and decides the tradeoff is worth it. So yes, I'd call these killings "intentional".
English
2
0
0
23
Jacob Drori
Jacob Drori@jacobcd52·
@BoggisCat @liron @RabbiMivasair Then he should have said that, Rather than "You’re more likely to find someone who shot a 5 year old to death in Palestine", which is obviously false. > Presumably the inmates at Sobibor were responsible for most of them being killed No, your model of my beliefs is really bad.
English
1
0
0
32
boggis the cat
boggis the cat@BoggisCat·
@jacobcd52 @liron @RabbiMivasair He is trying to claim that civilian deaths, including children, are the fault of Hamas. Presumably the inmates at Sobibor were responsible for most of them being killed when they attempted their mass breakout, and the Warsaw ghetto shouldn’t have fought their Nazi captors?
English
1
0
0
29
Liron Shapira
Liron Shapira@liron·
@jacobcd52 @RabbiMivasair Killed causally downstream of Hamas laying a human shield trap and having the trap go off, yes. Killed by a bullet from an Israeli, no.
English
2
0
1
119
Jacob Drori
Jacob Drori@jacobcd52·
@Alien_AV @liron @RabbiMivasair So, since Oct 7, >100x more Gazan 5yos have been killed by Israel than the reverse Tbf, Liron's tweet was about number of 5yo-killers, not of killed 5yos. But that seems unimportant. Also, I only counted deaths since Oct 7, but I expect all-time numbers tell the same story 3/3
English
2
0
0
28
Liron Shapira
Liron Shapira@liron·
@RabbiMivasair You’re more likely to find someone who shot a 5 year old to death in Palestine
English
5
0
54
2.5K
Jacob Drori
Jacob Drori@jacobcd52·
@RatOrthodox industrial revolution yearly gdp growth was low single-digits. it seems plausible that RSI "only" leads to, idk, 20% yearly growth. my probability of such an outcome hasn't really shifted in the last couple years parameter count/sample efficiency overhangs are indeed worrying
English
1
0
1
223
Brangus🔍⏹️
Brangus🔍⏹️@RatOrthodox·
Roughly because labs plan to do recursive self improvement, this is looking like it will work, and models are nowhere near parameter count efficient. Furthermore, because civilization is retarded and cannot notice it has one industrial revolution ready to go before it loads 25 more in the queue
English
4
0
11
632
Brangus🔍⏹️
Brangus🔍⏹️@RatOrthodox·
So now that it’s p obvious we won’t see “reasonable” doubling times of a few years before we see unreasonable doubling times of a few months, how many bayes points you giving the doomers?
English
11
3
58
11.5K
Jacob Drori
Jacob Drori@jacobcd52·
@tszzl if someone writes a bad contract, and I publicly say "that is a bad contract", and then they change the contract, I don't think I need to publicly retract my criticism. (though maybe those arent the "previous statements" you were referring to, idk)
English
0
0
2
146
roon
roon@tszzl·
im sure everyone will be very fair and give this the credit it deserves and publicly retract their previous statements and apply the appropriate burden of evidence
Sam Altman@sama

Here is re-post of an internal post: We have been working with the DoW to make some additions in our agreement to make our principles very clear. 1. We are going to amend our deal to add this language, in addition to everything else: "• Consistent with applicable laws, including the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution, National Security Act of 1947, FISA Act of 1978, the AI system shall not be intentionally used for domestic surveillance of U.S. persons and nationals. • For the avoidance of doubt, the Department understands this limitation to prohibit deliberate tracking, surveillance, or monitoring of U.S. persons or nationals, including through the procurement or use of commercially acquired personal or identifiable information." It’s critical to protect the civil liberties of Americans, and there was so much focus on this, that we wanted to make this point especially clear, including around commercially acquired information. Just like everything we do with iterative deployment, we will continue to learn and refine as we go. I think this is an important change; our team and the DoW team did a great job working on it. 2. The Department also affirmed that our services will not be used by Department of War intelligence agencies (for example, the NSA). Any services to those agencies would require a follow-on modification to our contract. 3. For extreme clarity: we want to work through democratic processes. It should be the government making the key decisions about society. We want to have a voice, and a seat at the table where we can share our expertise, and to fight for principles of liberty. But we are clear on how the system works (because a lot of people have asked, if I received what I believed was an unconstitutional order, of course I would rather go to jail than follow it). But 4. There are many things the technology just isn’t ready for, and many areas we don’t yet understand the tradeoffs required for safety. We will work through these, slowly, with the DoW, with technical safeguards and other methods. 5. One thing I think I did wrong: we shouldn't have rushed to get this out on Friday. The issues are super complex, and demand clear communication. We were genuinely trying to de-escalate things and avoid a much worse outcome, but I think it just looked opportunistic and sloppy. Good learning experience for me as we face higher-stakes decisions in the future. In my conversations over the weekend, I reiterated that Anthropic should not be designated as a SCR, and that we hope the DoW offers them the same terms we’ve agreed to. We will host an All Hands tomorrow morning to answer more questions.

English
230
19
833
122.2K
Jacob Drori
Jacob Drori@jacobcd52·
or maybe I've been duped idk
English
0
0
0
29
Jacob Drori
Jacob Drori@jacobcd52·
seems like a big improvement? I wonder how much this decision was affected by X discourse. could this be a rare W for x the everything app...
Sam Altman@sama

Here is re-post of an internal post: We have been working with the DoW to make some additions in our agreement to make our principles very clear. 1. We are going to amend our deal to add this language, in addition to everything else: "• Consistent with applicable laws, including the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution, National Security Act of 1947, FISA Act of 1978, the AI system shall not be intentionally used for domestic surveillance of U.S. persons and nationals. • For the avoidance of doubt, the Department understands this limitation to prohibit deliberate tracking, surveillance, or monitoring of U.S. persons or nationals, including through the procurement or use of commercially acquired personal or identifiable information." It’s critical to protect the civil liberties of Americans, and there was so much focus on this, that we wanted to make this point especially clear, including around commercially acquired information. Just like everything we do with iterative deployment, we will continue to learn and refine as we go. I think this is an important change; our team and the DoW team did a great job working on it. 2. The Department also affirmed that our services will not be used by Department of War intelligence agencies (for example, the NSA). Any services to those agencies would require a follow-on modification to our contract. 3. For extreme clarity: we want to work through democratic processes. It should be the government making the key decisions about society. We want to have a voice, and a seat at the table where we can share our expertise, and to fight for principles of liberty. But we are clear on how the system works (because a lot of people have asked, if I received what I believed was an unconstitutional order, of course I would rather go to jail than follow it). But 4. There are many things the technology just isn’t ready for, and many areas we don’t yet understand the tradeoffs required for safety. We will work through these, slowly, with the DoW, with technical safeguards and other methods. 5. One thing I think I did wrong: we shouldn't have rushed to get this out on Friday. The issues are super complex, and demand clear communication. We were genuinely trying to de-escalate things and avoid a much worse outcome, but I think it just looked opportunistic and sloppy. Good learning experience for me as we face higher-stakes decisions in the future. In my conversations over the weekend, I reiterated that Anthropic should not be designated as a SCR, and that we hope the DoW offers them the same terms we’ve agreed to. We will host an All Hands tomorrow morning to answer more questions.

English
1
0
0
61
Jacob Drori
Jacob Drori@jacobcd52·
like a tattoo - sade. good song
English
0
0
0
41
Nick
Nick@nickcammarata·
dario for president 2028
English
26
17
691
25.9K