/explore
|
You are here 
|
www.alignmentforum.org | ||
| | | | |
www.greaterwrong.com
|
|
| | | | | Anthropic just published a pretty impressive set of results in interpretability. This raises for me, some questions and a concern: Interpretability helps, but it isn't alignment, right? It seems to me as though the vast bulk of alignment funding is now going to interpretability. Who is thinking about how to leverage interpretability into alignment? It intuitively seems as though we are better off the more we understand the cognition of foundation models. I think this is true, but there are sharp limits: it will be impossible to track the full cognition of an AGI, and simply knowing what it's thinking about will be inadequate to know whether it's making plans you like. One can think about bioweapons, for instance, to either produce them or prevent producing t... | |
| | | | |
www.lesswrong.com
|
|
| | | | | Note: I really appreciate the work that the OpenAI alignment team put into their alignment plan writeup and related posts, especially Jan Leike, the... | |
| | | | |
vkrakovna.wordpress.com
|
|
| | | | | (This post is based on an overview talk I gave at UCL EA and Oxford AI society (recording here). Cross-posted to the Alignment Forum. Thanks to Janos Kramar for detailed feedback on this post and to Rohin Shah for feedback on the talk.) This is my high-level view of the AI alignment research landscape and... | |
| | | | |
www.newyorker.com
|
|
| | | Matthew Hutson on technologists' warnings about the dangers of the so-called singularity, and the question of whether anything can be done to prevent it. | ||
