Thanks those are some fair points. I think I am just using language that others use, so there is some shared understanding, even though it carries with it a lot of fuzziness like you say.
Maybe we can think of better language than “near term” or “long term” framing or just be more precise.
Open Phil had this issue—they now use ‘Global Health & Wellbeing’ and ‘Global Catastrophic Risks’, which I think captures the substantive focus of each.
Thanks those are some fair points. I think I am just using language that others use, so there is some shared understanding, even though it carries with it a lot of fuzziness like you say.
Maybe we can think of better language than “near term” or “long term” framing or just be more precise.
Open Phil had this issue—they now use ‘Global Health & Wellbeing’ and ‘Global Catastrophic Risks’, which I think captures the substantive focus of each.