Vael Gates
Posts 17
Comments47
Not directly relevant to the OP, but another post covering research taste: An Opinionated Guide to ML Research (also see Rohin Shah's advice about PhD programs (search "Q. What skills will I learn from a PhD?") for some commentary.
Small update: Two authors gave me permission to publish their transcripts non-anonymously!
Two authors gave me permission to publish their transcripts non-anonymously! Thus:
No, the same set of ~28 authors read all of the readings.
The order of the readings was indeed specified:
- Concise overview (Stuart Russell, Sam Bowman; 30 minutes)
- Different styles of thinking about future AI systems (Jacob Steinhardt; 30 minutes)
- A more in-depth argument for highly advanced AI being a serious risk (Joe Carlsmith; 30 minutes)
- A more detailed description of how deep learning models could become dangerously "misaligned" and why this might be difficult to solve with current ML techniques (Ajeya Cotra; 30 minutes)
- An overview of different research directions (Paul Christiano; 30 minutes)
- A study of what ML researchers think about these issues (Vael Gates; 45 minutes)
- Some common misconceptions (John Schulman; 15 minutes)
Researchers had the option to read the transcripts where transcripts were available; we said that consuming the content in either form (video or transcript) was fine.
I didn't give a disagreement vote, but I do disagree on aisafety.training being the "single most useful link to give anyone who wants to join the effort of AI Safety research", just because there's a lot of different resources out there and I think "most useful" depends on the audience. I do think it's a useful link, but most useful is a hard bar to meet!