All of Pradyumna's Comments + Replies

Revving up the Progress Studies Idea Machine

yes but that was done with the assumption that the best way is to increase productivity growth

Revving up the Progress Studies Idea Machine

yeah absolutely, but I think there has already been a consensus on this part. Generally people consider it to be 1

1Alexander de Vries2yInteresting; since as far as I can tell, Tyler Cowen and Patrick Collison use definition #2 in the now-famous Atlantic article [https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2019/07/we-need-new-science-progress/594946/] : "In an era where funding for good projects can be hard to come by, or is even endangered, we must affirmatively make the case for the study of how to improve human well-being." Maybe PS adopted definition #1 instead to avoid seeming redundant compared to EA?

Pradyumna's Shortform

Pradyumna2y2

This hackernews thread about working at the DoE national labs gives a positive impression of them although with some caveats

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34414527

Tyler Cowen AMA

Pradyumna2y2

Unrelated to the accuracy of this, it feels ChatGPT generated. If so, we'll played

Tyler Cowen AMA

Pradyumna2y1

To what extent is fieldwork underrated by economists? I feel it is quite so because it captures things that numbers often lose (eg nuance) and context that is hard to get without it. IMO i

t shouldn't be the best form of evidence, but definitely a starting point in it

2Tyler Cowen2yThe researcher also learns a great deal doing fieldwork that is not learned sitting at the PC, or whatever. That makes field work all the more underrated.

Tyler Cowen AMA

Pradyumna2y1

How do the returns to high verbal intelligence change if AI gains the writing abilities of the median NYT opinion writer? How should people whose comparative advantage is in writing prepare for this?

2Tyler Cowen2yPossible answer: The returns to high verbal intelligence will not necessarily fall if AI gains the writing abilities of the median NYT opinion writer, but they will become more heterogeneous and dependent on the context and purpose of writing. AI may be able to generate coherent, grammatical, and persuasive prose on a variety of topics, but it may not be able to capture the nuances, subtleties, and originality of human expression, nor the emotional, ethical, and aesthetic dimensions of writing. Moreover, AI may not be able to adapt to changing audience preferences, cultural norms, and rhetorical situations, nor to respond to feedback, criticism, and dialogue. Therefore, human writers who can leverage their high verbal intelligence to produce more creative, engaging, and distinctive writing will still have a significant advantage over AI, especially in domains that require more personal, emotional, or artistic communication, such as fiction, poetry, memoir, humor, or criticism. However, human writers who rely on conventional, formulaic, or generic writing may face more competition and lower returns from AI, especially in domains that require more factual, analytical, or informative communication, such as news, reports, essays, or reviews. People whose comparative advantage is in writing should prepare for this scenario by developing and honing their unique voice.

Patrick McKenzie AMA

Pradyumna2y3

Singapore has a government entity that builds open source technologies (eg static site generator, form maker) for other government departments to use. Could you se this being replicated elsewhere?

4patio112yI don't particularly think OSS is a necessary component of that model, but we've seen similar things with some level of efficacy in both the UK and Japan, which suggests to me that a very similar thing would achieve some level of impact in the US. The US Digital Service and similar have a portfolio approach; it will be interesting to see if they move in the direction of producing self-serve tools. (I do not perceive that as being a large portion of their portfolio as of today but am not an expert w/r/t their portfolio.)