I'm writing a more in-depth review of the State of Feedbackloop Rationality. (I've written a short review on the original post)

But I feel like a lot of people have some kind of skepticism that isn't really addressed by "well, after 6 months of work spread out over 1.5 years, I've made... some progress, which feels promising enough to me to keep going but is not overwhelming evidence if you're skeptical."

So, this post is sort of a rant about that.

A lot of people have default skepticism about "the feedbackloop rationality paradigm" because, well, every rationality paradigm so far has come with big dreams and underdelivered. I, too, have big dreams, and I am probably not going to achieve them as much as I want. That's not a crux[1] for me.

A lot of people also have some sort of notion that "building multiple feedback loops" is [...]

---

Outline:

(04:17) FAQ on some things that seem reasonable to be skeptical about

(04:23) I dont think practicing better thinking will help me. I think I should focus on domain-specific skills.

(05:49) Okay, but I dont think you can practice at thinking, at least about the parts that matter. Focusing on feedback loops will lead you to goodhart.

(07:56) Maybe, but this will just take so much time. Why is this going to pay off enough to be better than object level research?

(10:52) Realistically, I know I wont stick to this sort of thing, and even if itd work if I stick to it, in practice itll just sort of sputter and fail. Which doesnt seem worth it.

(11:46) Okay but I bet Ray is doing some oddly specific stuff that works for Ray and dont really think itll help me.

(12:50) The skill ceiling here doesnt seem that high, Im already pretty competent, it doesnt seem worth it.

(13:42) Why (exactly) wont it work (for you, specifically)

The original text contained 3 footnotes which were omitted from this narration.

---

First published:

Source:

Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO.