This seems right to me - personally I am more likely to read a post if it is by someone I know (in person or by reputation). I think selfishly this is the right choice as those posts are more likely to be interesting/valuable to me. But it is also perhaps a bad norm as we want new writers to have an easy route in, even if no-one recognises their name. So I try to not index too heavily on whether I know the person.

Should EA avoid using AI art for non-research purposes?

Seems somewhat epistemically toxic to give in to a populist backlash against AI art if I don't buy the arguments for it being bad myself.

I just remembered another sub-category that seems important to me: AI-enabled very accurate lie detection. This could be useful for many things, but most of all for helping make credible commitments in high-stakes US-China ASI negotiations.

Thanks Caleb, very useful. @ConnorA I'm interested in your thoughts re how to balance comms on catastrophic/existential risks and things like Deepfakes. (I don't know about the particular past efforts Caleb mentioned, and I think I am more open to comms of Deepfakes being useful to develop a broader coalition, even though deepfakes are a tiny fraction of what I care about wrt AI.)

Have you applied to LTFF? Seems like the sort of thing they would/should fund. @Linch @calebp if you have actually already evaluated this project I would be interested in your thoughts as would others I imagine! (Of course, if you decided not to fund it, I'm not saying the rest of us should defer to you, but it would be interesting to know and take into account.)

Unclear - as they note early on, many people have even shorter timelines than Ege, so not representeative in that sense. But probably many of the debates are at least relevant axes people disagree on.

o1-pro!

Here is a long AI summary of the podcast.

If these people weren't really helping the companies it seems surprising salaries are so high?

I think I directionally agree!

One example of timelines feeling very decision-relevant is for people who are looking to specialise in partisan influence, you might want to specialise far more in Republicans the larger your credence in TAI/ASI by Jan 2029. Whereas for longer timelines on priors Democrats have a ~50% chance of controlling the presidency from 2029, so specialising in Dem political comms could make more sense.