Those numbers sound pretty reasonable to me, but, since they’re roughly my own credences, it’s probably unsurprising that I’m describing them as “pretty reasonable” :)
On the other hand, depending on what counts as being “convinced” of the classic arguments, I think it’s plausible they actually support a substantially higher probability. I certainly know that some people assign a significantly higher than 10% chance to an AI-based existential catastrophe this century. And I believe that Toby’s estimate, for example, involved weighing up different possible views.
Those numbers sound pretty reasonable to me, but, since they’re roughly my own credences, it’s probably unsurprising that I’m describing them as “pretty reasonable” :)
On the other hand, depending on what counts as being “convinced” of the classic arguments, I think it’s plausible they actually support a substantially higher probability. I certainly know that some people assign a significantly higher than 10% chance to an AI-based existential catastrophe this century. And I believe that Toby’s estimate, for example, involved weighing up different possible views.