The risk is non-zero, but you made a stronger claim that it was āthe most probable extinction risk aroundā.
EDIT: As for reasons to think they will reverse, they seem to be a product of liberal modernity, but currently we need a population way, way above the minimum viable number to keep long term modernity going. Maybe AI could change that I guess, but itās very hard to make predictions about the demographic trend if AI does all work.
I wrote āperhaps the simplest and most probable extinction riskā. Thereās room for others to judge another more probable. But itās perfectly reasonable to take as most probable the only one that is currently on track to cause extinction. (Itās hard to make confident predictions about any extinction risks.) I think it would be silly to dismiss this simply due to uncertainty about future trends.
The risk is non-zero, but you made a stronger claim that it was āthe most probable extinction risk aroundā.
EDIT: As for reasons to think they will reverse, they seem to be a product of liberal modernity, but currently we need a population way, way above the minimum viable number to keep long term modernity going. Maybe AI could change that I guess, but itās very hard to make predictions about the demographic trend if AI does all work.
I wrote āperhaps the simplest and most probable extinction riskā. Thereās room for others to judge another more probable. But itās perfectly reasonable to take as most probable the only one that is currently on track to cause extinction. (Itās hard to make confident predictions about any extinction risks.) I think it would be silly to dismiss this simply due to uncertainty about future trends.