I agree with your first paragraph (and I think we probably agree on a lot!), but in your second paragraph, you link to a Nick Bostrom paper from 2003, which is 14 years before the term ālongtermismā was coined.
I think, independently from anything to do with the term ālongtermismā, there is plenty you could criticize in Bostromās work, such as being overly complicated or outlandish, despite there being a core of truth in there somewhere.
But thatās a point about Bostromās work that long predates the term ālongtermismā, not a point about whether coining and promoting that term was a good idea or not.
I agree with your first paragraph (and I think we probably agree on a lot!), but in your second paragraph, you link to a Nick Bostrom paper from 2003, which is 14 years before the term ālongtermismā was coined.
I think, independently from anything to do with the term ālongtermismā, there is plenty you could criticize in Bostromās work, such as being overly complicated or outlandish, despite there being a core of truth in there somewhere.
But thatās a point about Bostromās work that long predates the term ālongtermismā, not a point about whether coining and promoting that term was a good idea or not.