Do you hold a totalist view of population ethics? If you donāt you may want to funnel out all x-risk reduction charities
āX-riskā is typically short for āexistential riskā, which includes extinction risk, but also includes risks of unrecoverable collapse, unrecoverable dystopia, and some (but not all) s-risks/āsuffering catastrophes. (See here.)
My understanding is that, if we condition on rejecting totalism:
Risk of unrecoverable collapse probably becomes way less important (though this is a bit less clear)
Risk of unrecoverable dystopia still retains much of its importance
Suffering risk still retains much of its importance
(See here for some discussion relevant to those points.)
So maybe by āx-riskā you actually meant āextinction riskā, rather than āexistential riskā? (Using āx-riskā/āāexistential riskā as synonymous with just āextinction riskā is unfortunately common, but goes against Bostrom and Ordās definitions.)
[Tangent]
āX-riskā is typically short for āexistential riskā, which includes extinction risk, but also includes risks of unrecoverable collapse, unrecoverable dystopia, and some (but not all) s-risks/āsuffering catastrophes. (See here.)
My understanding is that, if we condition on rejecting totalism:
Risk of extinction becomes way less important
Though itād still matter due to its effects on the present generation
Risk of unrecoverable collapse probably becomes way less important (though this is a bit less clear)
Risk of unrecoverable dystopia still retains much of its importance
Suffering risk still retains much of its importance
(See here for some discussion relevant to those points.)
So maybe by āx-riskā you actually meant āextinction riskā, rather than āexistential riskā? (Using āx-riskā/āāexistential riskā as synonymous with just āextinction riskā is unfortunately common, but goes against Bostrom and Ordās definitions.)
Yeah absolutely, this was my tired 11pm brain. I meant to refer to extinction risk whenever I said x-risk. Iāll edit.