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
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.
Going to get this in before the SB 1047 decision is made, so that it doesn't just come across as commentary on the decision: this was the California legislative process I've reported on most closely and it actually made me feel notably more proud of California democracy.
The state politicians I talked to all seemed pretty smart, they'd talked to a lot of different people and could articulate several different perspectives, they did a good job of having their eye on the ball and seeing what the most important questions and disagreements were.
There was a fairly astonishing amount of mudslinging and lying but no one I talked to in state politics was really all that fooled by it. I got the sense that lying worked as a strategy less well than I would cynically have predicted.
A bunch of people learned about Don Poldermans' use of fictitious data in the DECREASE trial series that informed European surgical guidelines from my newsletter last Friday. I got a bunch of questions, in particular about the estimated fatalities (🧵)
And I wanted to talk a bit more baout whether Poldermans really killed 800,000 people. Here's what I wrote in the newsletter:
The 800,000 number comes from cardiologists Graham Cole and Darrel Francis, who are also two of the authors of the meta-analysis that found a 27% increase in deaths if beta-blockers are given before surgery.
Okay I'm sorry but I absolutely despise the 'elite hypocrisy' line here. No society has ever done more than ours to require poor people to live like the elite do, and this is often really bad for them. We ban cheap housing because it's better for people to live in nicer housing.
We ban (as child neglect, for which the punishment is stochastic 'never seeing your child again') having your upper elementary school aged children walk home from school, let themselves in, and work on their homework until their parents get home. Hire a babysitter!
We waste enormous amounts of money and state power making sure everyone's hairdressers are regulated and their daycare workers all have college degrees. Why? The elites send their kids to fancy preschools, and so they consider it a matter of justice to ban any other kind.
I think "there was a deal and it has broken down" is an incredibly powerful and pervasive sentiment in tech, not just among Trump supporters but among committed and sincere liberals too.
What was the deal? Hard to pin down exactly but something like - we will build ambitious things and pay high taxes and donate lots of money and mostly not play politics and you will treat us as valued pillars of our community, make our cities livable, stay mostly out of the way.
The abrupt tilt towards intensely negative coverage of tech felt like a breakdown of the deal. The attacks on tech shuttle buses? Breakdown of the deal. The state of San Francisco? Breakdown of the deal.