Also, can you guess which pelican SVG was gemini 3 vs 2.5? https://xcancel.com/xundecidability/status/19908113191723213...
> Eliezer Yudkowsky is a central figure in the article, mentioned multiple times as the intellectual originator of the community from which the "Zizians" splintered. His ideas and organizations are foundational to the entire narrative.The story isn't about Yudkowsky. At each level of summarization you have to make hard decisions about what to keep. Not every story about the United States needs to mention George Washington.
Edit: And upon skimming the article at the points where Yudkowsky's name is mentioned, I 100% agree with stickfigure.
I challenge you to name one way in which the story falls apart without the mention of Yudkowsky.
>do you think the model did a bad job then in it's second response
Yes, very obviously it told you what you wanted to hear. This is behavior that should not be surprising to you.
"Wtf - no mention of Yudkowsky?"
Here is specifically how he features in the article:
* *The Founder:* Yudkowsky is identified as the founder of the Machine Intelligence Research Institute (MIRI) and the Center for Applied Rationality (CFAR), as well as the founder of the LessWrong forum. These are the institutions the Zizians originally belonged to and eventually declared war against. * *The Source Code:* The Zizians based their radical worldview on Yudkowsky’s concepts, specifically *"timeless decision theory."* However, they believed they were applying his logic more rigorously than he was. They became convinced that Yudkowsky’s organizations had betrayed these principles (specifically regarding a rumor about MIRI paying blackmail to cover up a scandal), which they viewed as a moral failing that justified their rebellion.
They are *wrong*, and provided exactly the same immaterial evidence as you did in this thread(I still insist that the article suffers zero damage if you remove Yudkowsky from it and instead only mention the institutions and concepts that stem from him), but with all the behavior I've seen now, the summary which was the initial issue of this thread should have included him.
[What I would've really liked to do was to prompt for another person of equal non-prominence who was in the article but not in the summary, and see what comes up. But I sure am not reading the 80-102 minute article just for this and we're unlikely to find an agreement about the 'equal non-prominence' part if I challenged you to pick one.]
Asking the follow up "what are ALL the individuals mentioned in the story" results in both models listing ~40 names and both of those lists include Yudkowsky.