Not to be "gotcha", but out of true curiosity: may I ask if you speak multiple languages fluently?

Different languages afford different ways of thinking and speaking? Just talk to a translator in works of literature or poetry. Some languages are more verb-y or noun-y, and so are more about getting between things than being something. Or have more or less ambiguity due to tonal systems.

And while ambiguity can create miscommunication when misused, it also allows for different minds to hear one thing, but interpret it in ways more personal to them. When used pro-socially (and not manipulatively), this can afford cooperation that might not otherwise be possible. Saying things while leaving some things unsaid, that has utility if our collective project is certain forms of synchrony -- we can sync on some things while the ambiguity allows asynchrony to remain unresolved in less important dimensions, etc

Imho monoculture is toward death, not toward something golden.

I think there are a lot of paths where we just rock ourselves back to a regressed agency societal state, and just never have the capacity to have any affect on the wider universe. Which is maybe good for the universe, as we are certainly not a role-model for certain forms of balance. But maybe the balanced view doesn't seek to dominate and influence and become ubiquitous, after all

Mundane incremental research is cobbled from existing citations that already appear nearby in the record.

Basically, innovative research is a measure of bridging thought and domains that were previously not bridged. It's quite concrete as a measure in the citation record.

So we can know pretty conclusively.

Puja Ohlhaver gave a talk on this[1], and ran some experiments (that I had the pleasure to support on)

[1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=guLDNMAOn24

Neither you nor anyone can really know those without talking it out with people, to understand how all corners of the human experience are seeing things play out

If I were to just care if it's working out for me, that's perhaps like a farmer who's got a lot of dry good in storage being like "I'm all good" while not realizing how much trouble they're in if all their neighbors start starving after a drought...

Sounds like the fine-grain experience of being you is settled, but that doesn't say much about the larger coarse-grained experience of being you in society. People need to talk to tell you how that's gonna play out for you

It's absolutely not "fine". I'm saying maybe there's a complex region-beta paradox where we can't get to the other side of it unless some actors enter undesirable terrain (by their own measure), don't exit the stage, and play moves they'd prefer not to.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Region-beta_paradox

Something between single-cell work and advanced nonlinear DR methods (perhaps used in alignment work?) it always flags me

Serious question -- I'm not trying to disrespect. Neither you nor I can be properly informed, nor can be anyone else outside the company, as outside observers who lag behind the state of the art as new behaviors emerge, right?

That's a really surprising but immediately sensible example. It tweaked my brain. Thanks!

I think that was pretty common amongst "keeners" doing writing assignments.

Edit: don't get me wrong, I'm a happy user. But I'd also be a happy consumer of refined sugar in the early 20th century. I'm still not sure if these tools won't destabilize society to the point of collapse. I don't think we understand the complexity of what's going on nearly enough, and am certainly not optimistic about AI being net good for us

I don't have the means to research, but certainly there would be ample resources for such an attack in certain spaces??? Manufacturing social signal is hugely valuable

-- Canadian

We've already seen attackers simulate whole communities for attacks on individuals, and I'm just wondering when we're going to see someone simulate a whole open source community in a longer play, as an kickstart on a longer term strategy of compromise