Minor and plausible parameter changes here gets us back to their beliefs.
maybe we can accept that they didn’t encounter or have a different bar for x risks. So maybe it’s 10 risks they consider and 1 of those is AI risk at 100%.
maybe for many of the other risks their valuation is 5-25% (because they have a different value system for what’s bad or leads to lock in).
This seems a little ungenerous to the OP.
Minor and plausible parameter changes here gets us back to their beliefs.
maybe we can accept that they didn’t encounter or have a different bar for x risks. So maybe it’s 10 risks they consider and 1 of those is AI risk at 100%.
maybe for many of the other risks their valuation is 5-25% (because they have a different value system for what’s bad or leads to lock in).