The three arguments he did show are the most popular arguments in the academic literature, it makes sense to give them priority. The “godlike aligned AI will fix everything forever” hypothesis might be popular within a few subcultures, but in my opinion is severely unproven.
You have changed my mind though, I think that he should have addressed it with more than a footnote. If he added in a section briefly explaining why he thought it was bunk, would you be satisfied?
The three arguments he did show are the most popular arguments in the academic literature, it makes sense to give them priority. The “godlike aligned AI will fix everything forever” hypothesis might be popular within a few subcultures, but in my opinion is severely unproven.
You have changed my mind though, I think that he should have addressed it with more than a footnote. If he added in a section briefly explaining why he thought it was bunk, would you be satisfied?