Sounds like a very interesting and important question! One suggestion: why don’t you change the question to “If AGI goes well for humans, what is your likelihood that it will also go well for animals?”. I think this is an easier question to evaluate then assigning a likelihood to a likelihood. Like if I think there’s an 85% chance of AGI going well for animals, I’m sort of unclear what number I should give for the original question.
Fair point, but the polls don’t work particularly well for questions rather than statements. Plus we have comments you can attach to your vote so, for example if you thought there was an 85% chance, I’d recommend being most of the way to agreeing, and then commenting to explain your view.
Sounds like a very interesting and important question! One suggestion: why don’t you change the question to “If AGI goes well for humans, what is your likelihood that it will also go well for animals?”. I think this is an easier question to evaluate then assigning a likelihood to a likelihood. Like if I think there’s an 85% chance of AGI going well for animals, I’m sort of unclear what number I should give for the original question.
Fair point, but the polls don’t work particularly well for questions rather than statements. Plus we have comments you can attach to your vote so, for example if you thought there was an 85% chance, I’d recommend being most of the way to agreeing, and then commenting to explain your view.