Why should a person focus on your issue in particular, rather than
It looks like you meant to write something after this.
One way to react to this would be to try and compensate for motivation gaps when evaluating the strengths of different arguments. Like, if you are evaluating a claim, and side A has a hundred full time advocates but side B doesn’t, don’t just weigh up current arguments, weigh up how strong side B’s position would be if they also had a hundred full time advocates. A tough mental exercise!
This document seeks to outline why I feel uneasy about high existential risk estimates from AGI (e.g., 80% doom by 2070). When I try to verbalize this, I view considerations like
selection effects at the level of which arguments are discovered and distributed
community epistemic problems, and
increased uncertainty due to chains of reasoning with imperfect concepts
as real and important.
I still think that existential risk from AGI is important. But I don’t view it as certain or close to certain, and I think that something is going wrong when people see it as all but assured.
Great post, titotal!
It looks like you meant to write something after this.
Relatedly, there is this post from Nuño Sempere.