No I don't think so. Not because of the content but rather the lack of it. The people that already have some idea of the missing content are not the general audience that would benefit from this. In my opinion a TED talk is not an appropriate format. TED barely gave him enough time to tell us the sky is going to be falling. People will need more depth to see what that might look like and how it might apply to them and what it even means to look for it.
I believe the format should be that of a 3 or 4 hour long-format podcast. Oh and not just one but many. There should be at most 3 guests on each podcast or it turns into a disruptive debate but each guest should be very intelligent and should help Eliezer go deeper into each rabbit hole and illuminate the path the AGI may take to reach it's desired outcome and what logic it would have used to reach this outcome. There should also be discussions about how to mitigate the highest risks without entirely banning the technology since it is impossible to ban a framework or toolset world-wide. People should walk away with an understanding of how bad things may/will happen and how they might contribute to mitigating said bad things in their career field. Or at least spot when they are their colleagues may be empowering automation to do bad things.
There should also be a 3 hour long podcast that stays at surface level but also helps people especially legislators, regulators and military intelligence understand the topic enough to make informed decisions without inducing knee-jerk reactions thus leading to a self fulfilling prophecy of humans going to war over something that has not yet itself been a risk to us. There should probably also be some legal academic research to see which laws would already apply to anything AGI could do rather than trying to create new laws.
It does look like he has been on Lex Fridman's podcast [1] which I have not yet watched.
2 comments
[ 4.9 ms ] story [ 16.6 ms ] threadI believe the format should be that of a 3 or 4 hour long-format podcast. Oh and not just one but many. There should be at most 3 guests on each podcast or it turns into a disruptive debate but each guest should be very intelligent and should help Eliezer go deeper into each rabbit hole and illuminate the path the AGI may take to reach it's desired outcome and what logic it would have used to reach this outcome. There should also be discussions about how to mitigate the highest risks without entirely banning the technology since it is impossible to ban a framework or toolset world-wide. People should walk away with an understanding of how bad things may/will happen and how they might contribute to mitigating said bad things in their career field. Or at least spot when they are their colleagues may be empowering automation to do bad things.
There should also be a 3 hour long podcast that stays at surface level but also helps people especially legislators, regulators and military intelligence understand the topic enough to make informed decisions without inducing knee-jerk reactions thus leading to a self fulfilling prophecy of humans going to war over something that has not yet itself been a risk to us. There should probably also be some legal academic research to see which laws would already apply to anything AGI could do rather than trying to create new laws.
It does look like he has been on Lex Fridman's podcast [1] which I have not yet watched.
[1] - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AaTRHFaaPG8 [video][3 hr 17 min]