- Google continues gobbling up AI talent.
- New-ish psychology study method: “preregistered adversarial collaboration.” From the abstract: “Prior to data collection, the [disagreeing researchers] reached consensus on an optimal research design, formulated their expectations, and agreed to submit the findings to an academic journal regardless of the outcome… [they also] set up a publicly available… agreement that detailed the proposed design and all forseeable aspects of the data analysis.”
- I just noticed the WTF, Evolution? book is out.
I like high-quality written debates for which (1) one ‘top thinker’ on the subject makes an argument, (2) four or more other top thinkers on the subject reply, and (3) then the first author writes a final reply to his or her critics. I think of these as “symposium-style debates,” as contrasted with e.g. the Oxford-style debates seen in Economist Debates and elsewhere. (Is there another name for them?)
- Boston Review‘s Forum
- Cato Unbound
- Brain and Behavioral Sciences
- Psychological Inquiry
- American Journal of Bioethics (almost: there’s no final reply in this case)
- Various journal special issues and academic edited volumes that serve as symposia for published books or invited papers/chapters
Know of other examples?
- Hsu, “Super-intelligent humans are coming.”
- Winikoff, “Assurance of agent systems: what role should formal verification play?“
- New Friendly AI open problem description: “Corrigibility.”