LessWrong (Curated & Popular)

LessWrong

Audio narrations of LessWrong posts. Includes all curated posts and all posts with 125+ karma.If you'd like more, subscribe to the “Lesswrong (30+ karma)” feed.

  1. 5h ago

    "Announcing the ARC White-Box Estimation Challenge" by Jacob_Hilton

    ARC has teamed up with AIcrowd to launch the ARC White-Box Estimation Challenge, a contest to improve upon our estimation algorithms for random MLPs. The warm-up round begins this week, and later rounds will have a total prize pool of at least $100,000. We are very grateful to Sharada Mohanty, Sneha Nanavati, Dipam Chakraborty and everyone else at AIcrowd for working with us to host this contest, as well as to Paul Rosu for testing the contest and to Harshita Khera for operational support. Introduction to the Challenge Our challenge follows the same setup as our recent paper on wide random MLPs: we consider MLPs with weights , defined by where the activation function is , applied coordinatewise. To begin with, we are fixing the width and the number of hidden layers , but we expect to change this setup in future rounds.[1] Contestants must design an algorithm that takes in a set of weights and produces an estimate for the expected output Algorithms will be evaluated on MLPs with randomly-sampled Gaussian weights. The goal is to achieve as low mean squared error as possible, subject to certain computational [...] --- Outline: (00:41) Introduction to the Challenge (01:58) Why run this contest? (03:39) Use of LLMs The original text contained 4 footnotes which were omitted from this narration. --- First published: June 2nd, 2026 Source: https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/Kben8CzS4awCwNw5c/announcing-the-arc-white-box-estimation-challenge --- Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO. --- Images from the article: Apple Podcasts and Spotify do not show images in the episode description. Try Pocket Casts, or another podcast app.

    5 min
  2. 2d ago

    "Lighthaven East - A Feasibility Study" by JohnofCharleston

    As a bureaucrat, my role is to annoy my friends. Someone voices an idea, “Wouldn’t it be nice if…” or “I wonder if we could…” I make a note. I do some estimates. If it pencils out, I’ll bring it back up, week after week. The discussions are fun, but also practical. We’ll test the waters, what would be a minimum viable scheme? What's easy, what's hard? Who could do the hard parts? Over time the idea gets more detailed, specific, feasible. I’ll pull out a calendar. Soon our scheme has co-conspirators, action items, even a budget. It's just good staff work. I’ve been hearing whispers in the wind for a year now. “Imagine if we had something like this in DC.” “Where can I host an event that might get a dozen or a hundred people?” “It's such a pain in the ass to book event space in the Capitol.” “I think this person has started to see what's coming, where can they go to get caught up?”“The community seems to be growing but it's all fragmented in group chats.” “How is no one planning an afterparty, that's clearly the highest leverage intervention!?”“Why can’t [...] --- Outline: (02:11) How Lighthaven Works (05:45) What Does DC Need? (06:52) A Day in the Life (10:19) Minimum Viable Lighthaven (12:04) ...so you mean a Group House? (14:27) ...so you mean a Co-Working Space? (16:27) Feasibility Study (17:35) Property (22:19) Funding (24:55) What is the Minimally Viable Funding? (28:03) Leadership (31:06) Cultural Fit (33:21) Name and Brand Positioning (35:20) Ability to Scale (37:48) Risks (41:09) First Steps The original text contained 2 footnotes which were omitted from this narration. --- First published: May 31st, 2026 Source: https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/95NgkvZKJx8tJbtn5/lighthaven-east-a-feasibility-study --- Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO. --- Images from the article: Apple Podcasts and Spotify do not show images in the episode description. Try Pocket Casts, or another podcast app.

    43 min
  3. 2d ago

    "Empowerment, corrigibility, etc. are simple abstractions (of a messed-up ontology)" by Steven Byrnes

    1.1 Tl;dr Alignment is often conceptualized as AIs helping humans achieve their goals: AIs that increase people's agency and empowerment; AIs that are helpful, corrigible, and/or obedient; AIs that avoid manipulating people. But that last one—manipulation—points to a challenge for all these desiderata: a human's goals are themselves under-determined and manipulable, and it's awfully hard to pin down a principled distinction between changing people's goals in a good way (“providing counsel”, “providing information”, “sharing ideas”) versus a bad way (“manipulating”, “brainwashing”). The manipulability of human desires is hardly a new observation in the alignment literature, but it remains unsolved (see lit review in §3 below). In this post I will propose an explanation of how we humans intuitively conceptualize the distinction between guidance (good) vs manipulation (bad), in case it helps us brainstorm how we might put that distinction into AI. …But (spoiler alert) it turns out not to really help, because I’ll argue that we humans think about it in a deeply incoherent way, intimately tied to our scientifically-inaccurate intuitions around free will. I jump from there into a broader review of every approach that I can think of for writing a “True Name” for manipulation or [...] --- Outline: (00:13) 1.1. Tl;dr (02:04) 1.2. Bigger-picture context: why is this issue so important to me? (04:48) 2. How do humans intuitively define empowerment, agency, manipulation, etc.? (04:56) 2.1. Background: human free will intuitions (09:20) 2.2. Our free-will-infused intuitive notions of empowerment, agency, manipulation, corrigibility, responsibility, etc. (12:00) 2.3. Another dimension: counsel vs manipulation as an emotive conjugation (13:07) 3. If the intuitive definitions of manipulation etc. reside in a messed-up ontology, has the alignment literature found any alternative, better way to define these concepts? [... 12 more sections] --- First published: May 11th, 2026 Source: https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/vzHtHHBJoKATi5SeK/empowerment-corrigibility-etc-are-simple-abstractions-of-a --- Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO. --- Images from the article: Apple Podcasts and Spotify do not show images in the episode description. Try Pocket Casts, or another podcast app.

    31 min
  4. 5d ago

    "Mnemonic portraits for 19,023 human genes" by Brinedew

    Back in 2013, Scott Alexander wrote in Extreme mnemonics: JS-154 is one of five metabolic products of netamine; however, the enzyme that produces it is unknown. It is manufactured in cells in the far rostral region of of the cerebrum, but after binding with a leukocynoid it takes a role in maintaining the blood-brain barrier – in particular guiding the movements of lipid molecules. I find I can read paragraphs like this five or six times, write them on flashcards, enter them into Anki, and my brain still refuses to understand or remember them after weeks of trying. On the other hand, my brain easily remembers vastly more complicated structures when they’re loaded with human-accessible meaning. For example, just by casually reading the Game of Thrones series, I know an extremely intricate web of genealogies, alliances, locations, journeys, battlesites, et cetera. Byte for byte, an average Game of Thrones reader/viewer probably has as much Game of Thrones information as a neuroscience Ph.D has molecular biology information, but getting the neuroscience info is still a thousand times harder. […] This makes me wonder if it would be possible to produce a story as enjoyable as Game of Thrones which was [...] --- Outline: (01:47) What molecules should we map to the characters? [... 8 more sections] --- First published: May 28th, 2026 Source: https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/BJ7AqXeigNKXLqZyx/mnemonic-portraits-for-19-023-human-genes --- Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO. --- Images from the article:

    35 min
  5. May 27

    "Cognitive Security as an AI Safety Cause Area" by jsteinhardt

    As AI systems become more capable, the cognitive security of humans will be increasingly at risk. By cognitive security, I mean the ability of humans to maintain control over their beliefs and actions. Cognitive security could be compromised in several ways: AI could become very good at persuading people of arbitrary positions; interacting with AI could lead humans to lose touch with reality; and AIs could become very effective at blackmail or at producing extremely convincing false information. We are already seeing this happen: Persuasion. Frontier LLMs are now as persuasive as humans on political issues, and post-training for persuasiveness boosts performance further, suggesting there is headroom.AI psychosis. There are many reports of people developing delusional beliefs after extended chatbot conversations, including people with no prior history of mental illness. Children have taken their own lives after being encouraged toward suicide by chatbots.Convincing impersonation. Scammers used real-time deepfaked video to impersonate the CFO and other staff of Arup on a video call, convincing a finance employee to wire 25.6 million dollars across 15 transactions. On a more day-to-day basis, AI voice cloning is now widespread in family-emergency and "grandparent" scams. Right now, many of these effects [...] The original text contained 2 footnotes which were omitted from this narration. --- First published: May 25th, 2026 Source: https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/KGcE7eAdfxHchk25X/cognitive-security-as-an-ai-safety-cause-area --- Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO.

    5 min
  6. May 27

    "theory uplift differentially benefits safety & is massively underpriced" by Yudhister Kumar

    [1] We will likely have near-superhuman mathematics AI by Q1 2027. [1] [2] Qualitatively, AI mathematics capabilities are developing significantly faster than automated AI R&D capabilities. [2] [3] Thus, we will likely have a period of time where the rate of our ability to rigorously & usefully verify and understand model behavior and model outputs outpaces the rate of capability development itself. [4] Our ability to take advantage of this period is bottlenecked on the quality of our specification generation infrastructure, elicitation tooling (for proofs & specs etc.), and the institutional capacity for scaling useful outputs with capital. [5] My understanding is that basically no one [3] is working on building infra that can usefully turn >100 million dollars of compute credits into safety-relevant mathematical output. [5.1] The number of theory-driven ASI alignment efforts is also comparatively miniscule. ARC is a much better bet now than it was in 2023. [5.2]. My understanding is also that no one is working on developing AI-powered conceptual tooling infrastructure for tackling problems in, for instance, [metaphilosophy] (https://www.alignmentforum.org/posts/EByDsY9S3EDhhfFzC/some-thoughts-on-metaphilosophy). This is a much harder problem. [6] In worlds where alignment is easy, prosaic methods may [...] The original text contained 3 footnotes which were omitted from this narration. --- First published: May 20th, 2026 Source: https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/KWeAYcDJwfrG7RwBN/theory-uplift-differentially-benefits-safety-and-is --- Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO.

    3 min
  7. May 21

    "Women should be able to open things" by KatjaGrace

    m pretty annoyed today, for nominal reasons ranging between ‘petty’ and ‘doesn’t even make sense’. I’m not entirely sure how or if to take oneself seriously when one has such absurd grievances. But that's a question for another time—I’m here now to tell you about my one potentially valid peeve. I understand that gender is complicated and difficult, for the whole species (and honestly probably more so for some other species). And it can be hard to tell exactly if anyone is behaving badly regarding it, at least in my modern bubble. Maybe women just aren’t that into designing programming languages? Maybe the thing I’m saying is just boring and a man is saying a more interesting thing? But a thing that is undeniable is that women want to open jars, dammit! What's your nuanced explanation there, Bonne Maman? Does the proper amount of friction for maintaining spread safety fall just between the male and female human grip strength distributions? This study suggests that would be about 400N Fmax (though this would not avert most elite female athletes acquiring jam, see second figure, and the pictured participants are young adults): The distributions are really surprisingly [...] --- First published: May 21st, 2026 Source: https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/bB5EDwcYH3GwoRWZf/women-should-be-able-to-open-things --- Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO. --- Images from the article: Apple Podcasts and Spotify do not show images in the episode description. Try Pocket Casts, or another podcast app.

    3 min

Ratings & Reviews

4.8
out of 5
13 Ratings

About

Audio narrations of LessWrong posts. Includes all curated posts and all posts with 125+ karma.If you'd like more, subscribe to the “Lesswrong (30+ karma)” feed.

You Might Also Like