LessWrong 2.0 Reader

Let's just think about the pros and cons of picking another forum, vs. continuing to comment on LessWrong, but only being visible by others who choose to see you.

Picking another forum:

• They fit better in other forums than LessWrong. For most rate-limited users, this is true, but they can go to other forums on their own without being forced.
• Less need for LessWrong to write code and increase bandwidth to accommodate them.
• Less chance they say really bad things (neoreactionary content) which worsens the reputation of LessWrong? This doesn't apply to most rate-limited users.

Continuing to comment but only visible to those interested:

• They get to discuss the posts and topics they find engaging to talk about.
• They don't feel upset at LessWrong and the rationalist community.

I think whether it's worth it depends on how hard it is to write the code for them.

I agree that it's not looking good, if all you know is SBF and Zizians. But as far as I know, Annie Altman is not related to either rationalism or effective altruism.

Let's say a fast human can type around 80 words per minute. A rough average token conversion is 0.75 tokens per word. Lets call that 110 tokens/sec.

Isn't that 110 tokens/min, or about 2 tokens/sec? (I think the tokens/word might be words/token, too)

It's been almost four years since I wrote What 2026 Looks Like [LW · GW]. For those of you who read it >1 year ago: I'm curious to hear how it updated your beliefs or influenced your actions, if at all. (DM or reply) (crossposted from X) https://x.com/DKokotajlo67142/status/1886572374520389782

 

Someone should see how good Deep Research is at generating reports on AI Safety content.

(I’m using time-sensitive words, even though we are stepping out of the spacetime of our universe for parts of this discussion.)

Maybe use different words, so as not to imply that there is a temporal, causal, or spacial relation.

Many people realize that, conceptually “below” or “before” any “base universe,” there is

I don't realize or accept that.  Anything that would be in those categories are inaccessible to our universe, and not knowable or reachable from within.  They are literally imaginary.

Even if it’s the same cost to train, wouldn’t it still be a win if inference is a significant part of your compute budget?

Seems like it should be possible to automate this now but having all five participants be, for example, LLMs with access to chess AIs of various levels.

The same interviewer has now done two more podcasts on Ziz.

With Adrusi: 

With @jessicata [LW · GW]: 

Thank you very much for bringing that up. That does look like a clearer warning, somehow I didn't remember it very well.