David Bernard

Associate program officer @coeff_giving building capacity to tackle global catastrophic risks. PhD from @PSEinfo

[David Bernard @DavidRhysBern]

@jondr44 Nice idea and cool paper!

[catherine ʕ•ᴥ•ʔ-☆ @wilhelmscreamin]

come to my colleagues' substack for the capacity building hot takes, stay for the robotics gossip

[David Bernard @DavidRhysBern]

Full post: https://t.co/uwuvbYvy3o

[David Bernard @DavidRhysBern]

If your team's work is worth doing, it's worth doing as an org.

You should turn your project into an org because:
* Orgs are sticky
* Orgs can hire
* Orgs are legit
* Orgs force clarity

🧵

https://t.co/uwuvbYvy3o

[David Bernard @DavidRhysBern]

The marginal cost of forming an org is low, but the benefits compound. If your project is worth doing, seriously consider turning it into an org

[David Bernard @DavidRhysBern]

@maiamindel Are you at Asuncionico?

[Alex Armlovich @aarmlovi]

John & Laura did great with AV bc they wanted to manage research-based giving full time

There is, however, a pooled org for those seeking the highest good in their field, with on-call briefings & ridealongs from top quant experts, without having to start it all from scratch...

[Der Rosenkavalier @Humeanism]

@joachim_voth You may want to check Equation 25 in your 2013 RES Three Horsemen paper. I emailed your coauthor 6 years ago, and he acknowledged that mistake. This mistake seriously undermines your key result in that paper. But until now, there is no offcial erratum available.

[David Bernard @DavidRhysBern]

@joachim_voth Ah, so because you found 2 errors out of 171 corrections, that means you're not obliged to fix the rest of them? These tweets are unbecoming of you.

[joseph francis @joefrancis505]

I gave Voigtländer and Voth four months to respond to a first draft, but they singularly failed to address the issues I raise, preferring ad hominem attacks instead.

[The Midas Project @TheMidasProj]

Sam Altman is famous for being an effective wordsmith, so here are a few questions journalists and employees might want to be asking tonight:

- “Human responsibility for the use of autonomous weapons” does not at all sound like a prohibition on autonomous weapons. Does this just mean a human just has to sign off on the decision to deploy autonomous killbot before it’s used in the field? Or write a report about its inevitable mishaps?

- “Prohibitions on domestic surveillance” is an interesting use of plural. Is this a categorical prohibition or something narrower — prohibiting a few extreme examples?

- Does “putting these principles into the agreement” mean the DoD has agreed to abide by these ambiguous usage restrictions, or that the agreement makes mention of OpenAI’s principles while still only constraining DoD behavior to all lawful use?

- If OpenAI thinks all companies should be getting the same offer — and government coercion shouldn’t be used — did they consider making their acceptance of the contract conditional on revoking the supply chain risk designation from competitors?

[David Bernard @DavidRhysBern]

@operationdanish @pangram is this AI?

[David Bernard @DavidRhysBern]

@_revoluzia_ I'm reading this at the moment too! And very stressed that I'm not going to finish it before my library loan expires

[Matt Reardon @Mjreard]

I can't even find them on Google. EA over???

[David Bernard @DavidRhysBern]

https://t.co/BeO0NmcKhT

[David Bernard @DavidRhysBern]

"My prize was $5,000, which I donated to the Against Malaria Foundation" - Diarmuid Early, the Excel World Champion.

EAs not beating the spreadsheet altruist allegations any time soon.