Communications lead at MIRI. Unless otherwise indicated, my posts and comments here reflect my own views, and not necessarily my employer's.
May be useful to include in the review with some of the comments, or with a postmortem and analysis by Ben (or someone).
I don't think the discussion stands great on its own, but it may be helpful for:
Seems like a good starting point for discussion. Researchers need to have some picture of what AI alignment is "for," in order to think about what research directions look most promising.
I want to see more attempts to answer this question. Also related to another post I nominated: https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/PKy8NuNPknenkDY74/soft-takeoff-can-still-lead-to-decisive-strategic-advantage
I'm not a slow-takeoff proponent, and I don't agree with everything in this post; but I think it's asking a lot of the right questions and introducing some useful framings.
I've added the section-2 definitions above to https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/kLLu387fiwbis3otQ/cartesian-frames-definitions.
And now I've made a LW post collecting most of the definitions in the sequence so far, so they're easier to find: https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/kLLu387fiwbis3otQ/cartesian-frames-definitions
I'm collecting most of the definitions from this sequence on one page, for easier reference: https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/kLLu387fiwbis3otQ/cartesian-frames-definitions
For my personal use when I was helping review Scott's drafts, I made some mnemonics (complete with silly emojis to keep track of the small Cartesian frames and operations) here: https://docs.google.com/drawings/d/1bveBk5Pta_tml_4ezJ0oWiq-qudzgnsRlfbGJgZ1qv4/.
(Also includes my crude visualizations of morphism composition and homotopy equivalence to help those concepts stick better in my brain.)
I agree with this post.