You assume that decreasing existential risk over a given period does not affect the existential risk (or welfare) after that period, right? One could spend resources to decrease existential risk in 2025, but this will imply having (counterfactually) less resources in 2026. So a decreased risk in 2025 is partially offset by an increased risk in 2026.
You assume that decreasing existential risk over a given period does not affect the existential risk (or welfare) after that period, right? One could spend resources to decrease existential risk in 2025, but this will imply having (counterfactually) less resources in 2026. So a decreased risk in 2025 is partially offset by an increased risk in 2026.
Yeah, that’s right. Some kinds of mitigation will increase risks later (e.g. a pause), and the model doesn’t accommodate such nuance.