Why I'm joining Anthropic

post by evhub · 2023-01-05T01:12:13.822Z · LW · GW · 4 comments

Contents

4 comments

Personal blogpost. Previously: “What I'll be doing at MIRI [AF · GW]”

For the last three years (since I left OpenAI), I've been a Research Fellow at MIRI. Starting next week, however, I'm going to be stepping down from that position and joining Anthropic as a safety researcher instead.^[1]

To start with, some things that this does not mean:

• That I have anything in particular against MIRI.
• That I endorse everything Anthropic does.
• That I'm going to stop doing theoretical AI safety research.
• Any particular substantive change in my beliefs about AI safety.

So why do I think this is a good idea? The most basic reason is just that I think things are heating up and it'll be valuable for me to be closer to the action. I think current large language models are getting quite scary but that there's a lot of work to be done in understanding exactly how and what to do about it—see e.g. the recent paper I collaborated with Anthropic on [AF · GW]. I'll be splitting my time between theoretical and empirical work—both of which I'll continue to do—with the idea that being closer to current models should improve my ability to do both.

I expect that a lot of my time will be spent on the Conditioning Predictive Models agenda I've been working on for the past ~6 months, which I expect will be published in the next month or so. Until then, this post [AF · GW] and this post [AF · GW] probably contain the best current public writeups of some of the basic ideas. That being said, I won't be particularly tied down to it and might end up deciding to work on something completely different (e.g. what happened the last time I wrote up a big agenda [AF · GW]).

Since I'm sure I'm going to be asked about it a bunch now, some of my thoughts on Anthropic as an organization (obviously all thoughts are my own):

• I think it's really impressive and a very positive sign (and costly signal) that Anthropic has been able to do a bunch of capability work without publishing it.
• I think Anthropic is doing some of the best AI safety work of any organization right now—e.g. Transformer Circuits.
• Nevertheless, Anthropic is undoubtedly working on improving the capabilities of their models, and that absolutely has negative externalities, e.g. in increasing overall competition between labs.
• That being said, as someone whose overall estimates of AI existential risk are on the pessimistic side [AF · GW], I think high-variance bets—e.g. build cutting edge models so we can do cutting-edge AI safety work, have more leverage to influence other AI labs, etc.—can often make a lot of sense, especially when combined with strategies for mitigating potential downsides (e.g. not publishing capabilities advances).
• Overall, I think Anthropic's current strategy seems reasonable to me, but I am quite uncertain.

---

1. Though I will technically be keeping my MIRI affiliation as a Research Associate. ↩︎

4 comments

Comments sorted by top scores.