Something I believe:  The reason that society isn't currently freaking out about AI taking artists' jobs is mainly that we've historically thought of artists' jobs as inherently precarious, and so a new report of them being precarious for new reasons doesn't surprise anyone.  The moment it takes a "so stable your mom wants you to study it in school" job, that all will change for the stable folks, but not the artists, unfortunately.  After all, they're just artists... (If you say that this means that I don't care about artists or their financial challenges, you're wrong.  This sucks, I'm predicting, not endorsing, a likely scenario.)

Writing fiction on Substack being my hobby, I keep tabs on the rise of AI-written fiction. I came across this amusing example, a fiction story called Flagged as 97% AI, which is about a man unjustly accused of using AI to generate his thesis. It read off to me so I put it through Pangram. It flagged as 100% AI generated. 

Students in CS 2881r: AI safety did a number of fantastic projects, see https://boazbk.github.io/mltheoryseminar/student_projects.html  Also I finally updated the youtube channel with the final lecture as well as the oral presentations for projects, see 

People who want genius superbabies: how worried are you about unintended side effects of genetic interventions on personality? Even if we assume genetically modified babies will all be very healthy and smart on paper, genes that are correlated with intelligence might affect hard-to-measure but important traits. For example, they might alter aesthetic taste, emotional capacity, or moral/philosophical intuitions. From the subjective perspective of an unmodified human, these changes are likely to be "for the worse." If you pick your child's genes to maximize their IQ (or any other easily-measurable metric), you might end up with the human equivalent of a benchmaxxed LLM with amazing test scores but terrible vibes. I'd be hesitant to hand off the future to any successors which are super far off distribution from baseline humans. Once they exist, we obviously can't just take them back. And in the case of superbabies, we'd have to wait decades to find out what they're like once they've grown up.

Maybe twice a year I go looking for this comment and can't find it, so I'm copying it into shortform:

Multidimensional voting is good. It's nice to be able to distinguish "you're wrong" from "shut up" (or "you're right" from "well said"); and it's nice to be part of a community which makes & encourages that distinction.

I think that, if you're about to do something that you know is wrong, it's better to loudly declare to yourself and others that it's wrong. c.f. active inference, inoculation prompting, signalling, social memetics, etc, etc.