It seems plausible that p(annual collapse risk) is in part a function of the N friction as well? I think you may cover some of this here but can’t really remember.
e.g. a society with less non-renewables will have to be more sustainable survive/grow → resulting population is somehow more value aligned → reduced annual collapse risk.
or on the other side
nukes still exist and we can still launch them → we have higher N friction in pre nuclear age in the next society → increased annual collapse risk.
(i have a bad habit of just adding slop onto models and think this isn’t at all something that need be in the scope of original post just a curiousity).
I don’t think I covered any specific relationship between factors in that essay (except those that were formally modelled in), where I was mainly trying to lay out a framework that would even allow you to ask a question. This essay is the first time I’ve spent meaningful effort on trying to answer it.
I think it’s probably ok to treat the factors as a priori independent, since ultimately you have to run with your own priors. And for the sake of informing prioritisation decisions, you can decide case by case how much you imagine your counterfactual action changing each factor.
Very nice, thank you for writing.
It seems plausible that p(annual collapse risk) is in part a function of the N friction as well? I think you may cover some of this here but can’t really remember.
e.g. a society with less non-renewables will have to be more sustainable survive/grow → resulting population is somehow more value aligned → reduced annual collapse risk.
or on the other side
nukes still exist and we can still launch them → we have higher N friction in pre nuclear age in the next society → increased annual collapse risk.
(i have a bad habit of just adding slop onto models and think this isn’t at all something that need be in the scope of original post just a curiousity).
Thanks :)
I don’t think I covered any specific relationship between factors in that essay (except those that were formally modelled in), where I was mainly trying to lay out a framework that would even allow you to ask a question. This essay is the first time I’ve spent meaningful effort on trying to answer it.
I think it’s probably ok to treat the factors as a priori independent, since ultimately you have to run with your own priors. And for the sake of informing prioritisation decisions, you can decide case by case how much you imagine your counterfactual action changing each factor.