Hey Felipe, I'm currently doing community building at AI Safety Australia and New Zealand and I'm quite interested in decision theory (currently doing an adversarial collaboration with Abram Demski, a MIRI researcher on evidential decision theory). Would be keen to hear if you end up in Australia.
1
[Archived]
Not fundedGrant
$0raised
David Thorstad
over 2 years ago
Just a relevant piece of information: the ANU summer visitors season is one of the biggest and most impactful summer events in philosophy and tends to have a big impact on the careers and research trajectory of people who do it. It's something of a "who's who, and who would like to do cool things during their summer" of philosophy. They're also very strong in the relevant fields. I did the ANU visitors season largely because I'd learn more decision theory there than at Harvard.
Joel Becker
over 2 years ago
Why should I think your research is impactful in expectation? I couldn't find any information on your previous research on this proposal nor on your website.
If your ask is implicitly "I am seeking broad research training, not support on a particular research project" then I'd instead want you to expand on why this is likely to be helpful. (Are there experts in your preferred sub-fields at MIT? If there are not, should that make me concerned about you staying at MIT? What do you expect will be the short-term outcomes of a trip like this? Etc.)
Joel Becker
over 2 years ago
Thank you very much for the helpful detail Felipe! I'll have a think about this.
Joel Becker
over 2 years ago
Had a think and spoke with a philosopher I respect. Right now I think I do not want to fund this project, for the following reasons:
The summer fellowship indeed seems helpful for later academic placements (as you say). I'm less convinced that it will lead to you doing more exciting research, which feels closer to the thing I care about.
I suspect that you might get funding from non-Manifund sources, e.g. your department. (Do ANU expect junior scholars to pay thousands out of Ph.D. stipends without extra support from departments? If yes... wow!)
In part from my own experience being a junior researcher in GPR-land, I start pessimistic about the chances that junior GPR researchers will end up focusing on questions that I think are important (separate from whether or not they will be successful). This makes me relatively more interested in funding people with pre-existing research track records.
Weak view, largely stolen from others, that definitely isn't the pivotal consideration: I am skeptical that research on imprecise credences will be impactful. This is because I expect that the conclusions will make options appear more permissible than previously thought, which makes it less likely to be action-relevant.
I'm sure I've got some facts or interpretations wrong above -- happy to go back and forth!