My notes on what I liked about the post, from the announcement:
Many Forum posts try to cover very broad topics and wind up struggling to do them justice — not because the authors haven’t done excellent work (they often have), but because the world is enormously detailed and complex.
This post, on the other hand, aims at a question that… is still detailed and complex, but also sufficiently narrow that the author can tackle what seem to be most of the key sub-questions.
Particular aspects I liked:
The “questions that could be interesting to explore” section at the end. More posts should have these!
The summary that opens the post, which describes both the author’s process and her conclusions. Again: more posts should have these!
The formulation of probabilities for various claims: (you get the idea)
I do wish, however, that the post had been a bit more clear on how this question fits into Luisa’s overall perspective on nuclear risk, and what her conclusions in this post might imply for EA-aligned work in this space. (Of course, those might come up in some future post!)
This post was awarded an EA Forum Prize; see the prize announcement for more details.
My notes on what I liked about the post, from the announcement: