
Sign up to save your podcasts
Or


This is a rough research note – we’re sharing it for feedback and to spark discussion. We’re less confident in its methods and conclusions.
Summary
Different strategies make sense if timelines to AGI are short than if they are long.
In deciding when to spend resources to make AI go better, we should consider both:
We’ll call the second component "leverage." In this note, we'll focus on estimating the differences in leverage between different timeline scenarios and leave the question of their relative likelihood aside.
People sometimes argue that very short timelines are higher leverage because:
These are important points, but the argument misses some major countervailing considerations. Longer timelines:
There's a third consideration we think has been neglected: the expected value of the future conditional on reducing AI takeover risk under different timeline scenarios. Two factors pull in [...]
---
Outline:
(00:24) Summary
(02:29) Timelines scenarios and why they're action-relevant
(07:50) Understanding leverage
(11:09) Takeover impact
(11:20) The default value of the future is higher on medium timelines than short or long timelines
(17:54) Shorter timelines allow for larger AI takeover risk reduction
(20:53) Whether short or medium timelines are highest leverage depends on the resources or skillset being deployed
(22:35) Trajectory impact
(22:52) The default probability of averting AI takeover is higher on medium and longer timelines
(25:12) It's unclear whether feasible value increase is greater or lower on different timelines
(27:15) Conclusion
(29:08) Appendix: BOTEC estimating the default value of the future on different timelines
---
First published:
Source:
Linkpost URL:
https://www.forethought.org/research/short-timelines-arent-obviously-higher-leverage
---
Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO.
---
Images from the article:
Apple Podcasts and Spotify do not show images in the episode description. Try Pocket Casts, or another podcast app.
By EA Forum TeamThis is a rough research note – we’re sharing it for feedback and to spark discussion. We’re less confident in its methods and conclusions.
Summary
Different strategies make sense if timelines to AGI are short than if they are long.
In deciding when to spend resources to make AI go better, we should consider both:
We’ll call the second component "leverage." In this note, we'll focus on estimating the differences in leverage between different timeline scenarios and leave the question of their relative likelihood aside.
People sometimes argue that very short timelines are higher leverage because:
These are important points, but the argument misses some major countervailing considerations. Longer timelines:
There's a third consideration we think has been neglected: the expected value of the future conditional on reducing AI takeover risk under different timeline scenarios. Two factors pull in [...]
---
Outline:
(00:24) Summary
(02:29) Timelines scenarios and why they're action-relevant
(07:50) Understanding leverage
(11:09) Takeover impact
(11:20) The default value of the future is higher on medium timelines than short or long timelines
(17:54) Shorter timelines allow for larger AI takeover risk reduction
(20:53) Whether short or medium timelines are highest leverage depends on the resources or skillset being deployed
(22:35) Trajectory impact
(22:52) The default probability of averting AI takeover is higher on medium and longer timelines
(25:12) It's unclear whether feasible value increase is greater or lower on different timelines
(27:15) Conclusion
(29:08) Appendix: BOTEC estimating the default value of the future on different timelines
---
First published:
Source:
Linkpost URL:
https://www.forethought.org/research/short-timelines-arent-obviously-higher-leverage
---
Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO.
---
Images from the article:
Apple Podcasts and Spotify do not show images in the episode description. Try Pocket Casts, or another podcast app.