David Duvenaud

And then that's like, you know, anything more seems like somehow like inviolable or like unimaginable.

And again, I'm like, I know there are economists who are like taking this seriously, but most of them I think aren't.

And it's just like,

I want to be harsh, but I want to say like, this is sad and you're not doing your job.

And like, please try harder and have a bigger imagination.

Yeah.

I guess I'll say there are some cool directions that a lot of people are exploring, like trying to simulate little parts of civilization.

One cool thing you can do with LLM is make this little village or little mini economy that operates at a much finer grained level of detail than the normal economic models.

And so that's sort of its own little new field that's emerging.

And I really think this is going to help us get a grip on when are different types of things stable?

What are the actual drivers of cultural evolution or political stability?

They're still very ridiculously oversimplified models, but it's like, this is a new tool we have.

I'm really happy about this kind of work.

Yeah.

So, I mean, one of the first things to do in any debate is try to clarify the questions.

So one initiative that's happening, one of my co-authors is Dayer, who is the CEO of Metaculous, and him and some other people are trying to make the gradual disempowerment index.

And I think there's just a lot of work that we can do in trying to operationalize these claims of, like, humans won't be able to advocate for their own interests or, like, this lever of power will be, like...

hard, like will be even more disconnected from human interest than it has been.

I think these are like very vague claims that and it's pretty hard to say because a lot of them are these are very hard to operationalize because you have to like define what it means for like a group to want something and talk about these counterfactuals.

So this is like a very hard problem.