Given the stakes, it’s a bit surprising that “has risk of war secularly declined or are we just in a local minimum?” hasn’t received more attention from EA.
I conclude that [The Better Angels of Our Nature’s] big-picture point stands overall, but my analysis complicates the picture, implying that declines in deaths from everyday violence have been significantly (though probably not fully) offset by higher risks of large-scale, extreme sources of violence such as world wars and oppressive regimes.
If I recall correctly, Pinker also spent some time noting that violence appears to be moving to more of a power-law distribution since the early 20th Century (fewer episodes, magnitude of each episode is much more severe).
“War aversion” seems like a plausible x-risk reduction focus area in its own right (it sorta bridges AI risk, biosecurity, and nuclear security).
Robin Hanson’s latest (a) is related.
Given the stakes, it’s a bit surprising that “has risk of war secularly declined or are we just in a local minimum?” hasn’t received more attention from EA.
Holden looked at this (a) a few years ago and concluded:
If I recall correctly, Pinker also spent some time noting that violence appears to be moving to more of a power-law distribution since the early 20th Century (fewer episodes, magnitude of each episode is much more severe).
“War aversion” seems like a plausible x-risk reduction focus area in its own right (it sorta bridges AI risk, biosecurity, and nuclear security).
This chart really conveys the concern at a glance:
(source) (a)
… what if the curve swings upward again?