AI evals shouldn't be done by underpaid students but by stable, tenured research staff
tallinzen · x · 2026-09-17
Continuing the discussion: the author agrees it doesn't make sense for AI evals to be done by underpaid students who will soon be job-hunting; evals should be run by people with stable, well-paid staff positions, essentially tenured research scientists, to reduce incentive distortions.
Related event: Scholars debate who should run independent AI model evaluations(3 posts)→
More from Safety
- Cryptographers push back: claims ECC is likely to break are not consensus — jedisct1 · 2026-11-02
- UK's 'AI sovereignty' push undermined by its own energy and copyright policy — NinaDSchick · 2026-11-02
- Auditing my MCP credential broker: the worst hole was the config file — Relevant_Mousse_9117 · 2026-11-02
- Cambricon co-founder urges shared US-China AI ethics standards for leading models — pstAsiatech · 2026-11-02
- Vitalik's "post-AI cryptography": pseudonyms are dead, per-action anonymity is in — devanshmehta · 2026-11-02
- 6 prompts to see what ChatGPT quietly knows about you — and wipe it — Aiden_Tech_Ai · 2026-11-02