Late 18th century France

But if all the AI companies stopped training new models, they would all instantly become profitable (and stick around)

The thing that makes them unprofitable, is having to compete (which means training models). If / when enough companies exit the market, the cost to compete goes down and you end up in an equilibrium

Somewhat amusingly, mine depends on the examiner knowing how advanced AIs are. In the 1960s mine would just look like a trickle AI. It feeling human demands we assume the ai would actually be competent

Yours is even more effective. Both hinge on the solution being "be as unexpected and out-of-distribution as possible"

I somehow imagine they wouldn't like your essay that is made of 100% slurs though, regardless of how effective it is at the stated task

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embarrassingly_parallel

My point was that safety factors are a part of this. A safety factor of 1.0, designing bridges so that they can perfectly withstand the expectations of intended use, means that some unacceptable % of those bridges will fall down in practice.

In other words, it's true that you can explain safety factors as:

> Assuming perfect construction, and no defects, under designed maximum load, make sure that this bridge really stays up by a wide margin

But that misses the point of why we use safety factors. Nobody is paying for a bridge to really stay up by a wide margin. Because there's no material difference between a bridge that stays up, and a bridge that really stays up, right up until the point that the weaker one falls down due to inevitable over-loading or defects in construction / materials.

Without a safety factor, that uncertainty means that, some of the time, some of your bridge will fall down

In fact it's worse for the astronauts, because in this hypothetical only the heat shield failing will condemn the POs to death, whereas any critical part failing kills the astronauts

Yes, it's a much sexier job than project manager, but clearly there are some people, in some circumstances, that would accept it.

For a contrived example, imagine I'm in a warzone:

- Secure = Enemies can't read my messages. Good. But they can still triangulate my position.

- Covert = Enemies don't know I exist

- Signalling: I dress more formally than everyone else to make up for the fact I'm less professional in other ways

- No signalling: I dress like everyone else because I am like everyone else

- Countersignalling: I wear ratty old clothes with holes in them, and nobody will dare to question it because I'm the important one here