Press Space to continue
Curated tech Twitter/X posts on AI, startups, and product development—signal without the doomscroll, updated on weekdays.
Press Space to continue
Press Space to continue
This post has been widely discussed, but I think worth highlighting the important implications it has for Christian alignment and computational theology research more generally. First, the delicious implication that the puzzle of polysemanticity was a function of relatively primitive models means that the looming normative debate over alignment is closer than we might have imagined. Enormity helps. If more modern models naturally evolve towards interpretability, then one might suddenly end…
interpretability might be the most important scientific problem in the world right now, as I don't think we can solve alignment if we don't know what we're building. I think I have good news about it. I co-authored early work in mechanistic interpretability at OpenAI and came away pessimistic, because neural networks appeared to fold into arbitrary tangled knots. years later, I started openai's first large-scale automated interpretability project, finding about 2% of neurons legible with the primitive tools we had with modern agentic tools and a much closer look, the picture looks totally different. the vast majority in models up to trillions of parameters are legible, and their circuits beautiful. many famous examples of tangled neurons turned out to be misunderstood. The roadblocks I expected mostly aren't there. I now think ambitious interpretability will be solved by the time we need it most, and possibly quite soon, as automated scientists keep improving. it may be a bitter lesson for interpretability: the simple thing, at absurd scale, works https://t.co/zHij5zwKGT