I actually watched the whole #AlphaStar demo this morning with my girlfriend, who unlike me actually plays StarCraft. Read the article (vox.com/future-perfect…), but thoughts:
The systems we watched were trained for seven and fourteen days real-time, which is 200-400 years of gameplay time accumulated. In a way, "number of days" is misleading as a stat, it's pretty much just a function of how much compute you bought.
Nonetheless I think it merits a mention, because ....DeepMind decided in November or December to focus here. They then got top-pro level play in the space of about a month real time. Yes, this is because they can do a lot in parallel. But... they can do a lot in parallel.
From an AI capabilities perspective it's the amount of compute that's actually interesting. But from the perspective of thinking about how the deployment of these systems is going to happen, the fact so little real-world time is required is pretty critical actually.
Girlfriend and I disagree on whether this level of play given this much training time is impressive. I think it is. If you can get up to superhuman levels with two hundred years of training data there's a lot you can get up to superhuman levels at.
Girlfriend mostly contests that AlphaStar is all that superhuman. It wins by leaning in to its advantages as a computer -- micro, precision, multitasking. It's technically at par with humans in reaction time and actions per minute, but we both think a bigger handicap appropriate.
I think I have a model where.... human-level decisionmaking in most arenas plus the ability to really lean into the advantages of being a computer might be all you need.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
8 year old just asked at the dinner table "what is a liberal" and now three adults are vehemently speaking over each other. "people on the left in the United States tend to favor more government intervention in markets-" "that's NOT liberal don't you tell her that's liberal"
"kiddo, are you aware that in the past women didn't have as many rights as men? at the time, the people who wanted to change that were liberals" "that does NOT mean -" "today, BOTH liberals and conservatives are in favor of women getting the vote -"
she is gamely asking clarifying questions about the entire intellectual history of the west. the baby meanwhile noticed we were distracted and stole 28 fruit bars
Today in Vox, inspired by Zeynep's NYT editorial earlier this week, I wrote about why we badly need a Covid reckoning and are never, ever going to get one:
Covid touched the lives of every single American. Decisions that were made by public health officials dramatically transformed our lives. They were hard calls, and no one was going to get them perfect. But worse than the mistakes is the lack of reflection on what went wrong.
In 2022 I wrote a bit about this and got more angry responses than I've ever gotten. A lot of people were furious I didn't admit mistakes that I don't in fact think were mistakes. There's a deep well of fury and disagreement here, and it's not rewarding to stir it up.
I haven't had the chance to crack open my copy of Abundance yet so I've been avoiding wading into the discourse. But a thing I believe fervently is that the natural human desire for our lives, our neighborhoods, our communities and our world to be good, combined with the absurd material prosperity that we enjoy in the world today and the even more absurd material prosperity that our work can ensure is available to our children, ought to be sufficient for high and rising standards of living. We are rich enough to have spacious beautiful homes in shaded, safe neighborhoods with good schools and good jobs. We are rich enough for that to be in reach for every American who puts in the work to pursue it, and for it to be available to a growing share of the globe as well.
And we don't have it. And part of why we don't have it is because we have made it incredibly difficult and frustrating and prohibitive to build it.
A couple years ago, I and some other families came together to found a microschool for our kids, because they weren't well-served by the local public schools and the local private schools were staggeringly expensive and still not that incredible for the money. We run it out of the basement unit of my neighbor's home. The kids love it. They thrive there. We offer scholarships to make it available to families who could never afford it; we use an absurd amount of parent volunteer labor to make it possible and affordable.
Doing the administrative work to make this possible was basically a 20 hour a week job for me for the last two years, with huge contributions from a close friend who is a professional accountant and another close friend who likes doing taxes. There aren't a lot of rules on the books about a microschool like ours, so we had back and forths with the Oakland department of Child Care Licensing about whether a school needs to be a licensed daycare or not which took months to resolve and involved my contacting constituent services for help. California law had thankfully created a carveout for home care services in zoning laws, or we wouldn't hav ebeen able to do this at all. We've been trying to become a nonprofit for more than a year now, so that our ongoing large contributions to fund scholarships for other kids at our school can be legally eligible as donations. California requires that by the end of this year an employer offer their employees retirement accounts even if there's only 1 employee - the only state to make the requirement kick in even for tiny businesses. Getting liability insurance was a three month odyssey.
Friends who travel to South Asia talk a lot about the incredible, charming, quirky tiny businesses that you find everywhere, run out of homes - themed tea shops and craft shops and antique shops and mini-bakeries, a testament to the diversity of human interests and fascinations. You cannot do that here. You cannot do that here because it is illegal. Converting your garage into a tiny walk in tea shop is barred by municipal regulations in nearly every major US city; even running a home daycare is restricted by zoning laws in many of them. If you want to build a ADU in your backyard for your aging parents, you often need to spend years working through incomprehensible and expensive processes for permission. You need to be a determined, stubborn, bureaucratically fluent person with an absurd amount of time on your hands in order to do things in your own home, in your own community, to make it richer and healthier and better. That's a bad thing.
The first of my demands for a takeover of the Democratic party was a blackballing of every single person who concealed that Biden was in cognitive decline and obviously not capable of serving for four more years. A bunch of people questioned this demand.
Donald Trump is crushing our economy with insane tariff policies that kill investment. He's dismantling crucial services. Republicans are making housing and employment discrimination against trans people legal. He's burning our alliances. Why go after Biden's people?
But to me all of this is precisely the reason to go after Biden's people. The voters of the Democratic party made one thing incredibly clear: they wanted Democrats to beat Trump. Biden won the primary in 2020 predominantly because people wanted electability.
Every single person in the Biden administration who concealed that the President was unable to discharge his duties should be expelled from the party. (I know there's not really an expulsion mechanism; figure one out). They should never work in Democratic politics again.
The party will not consider for Presidential or Vice Presidential nominees any candidate from a state that is shrinking. If the people voted with their feet against your rule, then fix your own shit before you seek national office. We can call this the Go Away Gavin rule.
PEPFAR is one of the most popular, bipartisan US foreign aid programs. The State Department says it has saved 25million lives, but there isn't much public, independent verification. Last week I invited some friends to a weekend hackatjon to see if PEPFAR's numbers held up.
What we found was that, yeah, there's a pretty strong case for PEPFAR. Even using conservative assumptions and ignoring many of its positive impacts, our best guess is that the program indeed saved 19million lives by 2018.
We also got an appreciation for why PEPFAR is considered such a star program. Real funding for PEPFAR has been decreasing since 2009, but the program has been doing more over time, because costs have been in freefall. When it started each patient cost $1000/month. Now? $5/mo.