I think it’s of a very different style than most post on the forum. Those illustrations are far more intricate and artistic than anything I’ve seen here (nice work!). It reminds me a lot of pieces I’d see in more literary journals.
Looking at the current vote count, it seems like people were fairly conflicted on this particular piece. I could definitely intuit some of why; mainly because it’s so unusual. Most EA forum posts are very much to-the-point and factual, this one seems more exploratory. I’m a bit conflicted here because I could sympathize with both sides. At the same time, it’s really not fun to spend so much work on a piece and get what seems to be no engagement. (though, in fairness, I think that because this work is so speculative, and because there hasn’t been much discussion of the topic here, it is difficult to engage with)
I think that Fungi could probably use a fair amount more investigation by many sectors. They seem very promising, but also so far seemed like a huge challenge to understand and work with. There are several really neat tech companies and academics still experimenting with them.
I’m fairly conflicted on a lot of the x-risk applications discussed in this point, but would agree with a few main points:
Fungi are just really interesting, and they might have applications to fields we care about. (Definitely climate change, maybe bio risk somehow?)
Destroying the climate, including all fungi, would be an incredibly bold and likely massively destructive endeavor anytime soon (at least until we become massively more intelligent and wise)
Resilient studies could be valuable. I’m not sure how many lessons we can take from fungi, but maybe there are some.
Thanks Ozzie! Yes, I’m very aware that this is a strange post for the EA forum. In fact I think this post would have been strange anywhere. There’s no venue and a small audience for a post on fungi and existential risk.
Yet as with platforms such as instagram or twitter, I’m a fan to try defy the accepted and most rewarded formats and move the needle a little towards a more flexible format and more flexible thinking. That does of course mean that I give up likes or upvotes, but I have not spend enough time on these forums to care about this. Unfortunately I think there is a considerable number of posts that get upvoted a lot more than I would have found appropriate given their level of scholarship or originality. Lastly, the post did not take much time to write—as I mention I simply wrote up my naive impressions, in parts because I wanted to retain memory of the content of the book, in parts because there’s not much disccusion within EA on ecology-existential risk. I don’t know how long the illustrations took, but Magdalena is very talented and I suspect not much. So, thank you for you sympathy, but I’m ok :)
As for the rest of your comment: feeling conflicted seems useful! I agree with your last bullet points, even though they are so broad they are hard to argue with I guess (destroying the climate?). I have very little hope that this article alone will inspire grant funders to consider fungi research or start-ups, nor that EAs suddenly become very interested in ecology research, species extinction and the lessons we can learn from the climate crisis about existential risk.
But if I make it more likely that others who (unlike me) have studied these subjects, will write about them here and feel justified in steel-manning the position that our earthsystems and ecosystems play a vital role in existential risk, then I have moved the needle a little.
I found this post interesting, thank you.
I think it’s of a very different style than most post on the forum. Those illustrations are far more intricate and artistic than anything I’ve seen here (nice work!). It reminds me a lot of pieces I’d see in more literary journals.
Looking at the current vote count, it seems like people were fairly conflicted on this particular piece. I could definitely intuit some of why; mainly because it’s so unusual. Most EA forum posts are very much to-the-point and factual, this one seems more exploratory. I’m a bit conflicted here because I could sympathize with both sides. At the same time, it’s really not fun to spend so much work on a piece and get what seems to be no engagement. (though, in fairness, I think that because this work is so speculative, and because there hasn’t been much discussion of the topic here, it is difficult to engage with)
I think that Fungi could probably use a fair amount more investigation by many sectors. They seem very promising, but also so far seemed like a huge challenge to understand and work with. There are several really neat tech companies and academics still experimenting with them.
I’m fairly conflicted on a lot of the x-risk applications discussed in this point, but would agree with a few main points:
Fungi are just really interesting, and they might have applications to fields we care about. (Definitely climate change, maybe bio risk somehow?)
Destroying the climate, including all fungi, would be an incredibly bold and likely massively destructive endeavor anytime soon (at least until we become massively more intelligent and wise)
Resilient studies could be valuable. I’m not sure how many lessons we can take from fungi, but maybe there are some.
Thanks Ozzie! Yes, I’m very aware that this is a strange post for the EA forum. In fact I think this post would have been strange anywhere. There’s no venue and a small audience for a post on fungi and existential risk.
Yet as with platforms such as instagram or twitter, I’m a fan to try defy the accepted and most rewarded formats and move the needle a little towards a more flexible format and more flexible thinking. That does of course mean that I give up likes or upvotes, but I have not spend enough time on these forums to care about this. Unfortunately I think there is a considerable number of posts that get upvoted a lot more than I would have found appropriate given their level of scholarship or originality. Lastly, the post did not take much time to write—as I mention I simply wrote up my naive impressions, in parts because I wanted to retain memory of the content of the book, in parts because there’s not much disccusion within EA on ecology-existential risk. I don’t know how long the illustrations took, but Magdalena is very talented and I suspect not much. So, thank you for you sympathy, but I’m ok :)
As for the rest of your comment: feeling conflicted seems useful! I agree with your last bullet points, even though they are so broad they are hard to argue with I guess (destroying the climate?). I have very little hope that this article alone will inspire grant funders to consider fungi research or start-ups, nor that EAs suddenly become very interested in ecology research, species extinction and the lessons we can learn from the climate crisis about existential risk.
But if I make it more likely that others who (unlike me) have studied these subjects, will write about them here and feel justified in steel-manning the position that our earthsystems and ecosystems play a vital role in existential risk, then I have moved the needle a little.