I realize I didn’t choose a clear position on this in my description, and I’m actually not sure. I’d call a complete, seemingly irreversible collapse of civilization, even with humans remaining on earth (what the outcome of a nuclear war could be, for example), an X-risk even if it’s not full-on extinction, but when it comes to lock-in and disempowerment, since humans (and presumably other animals) remain numerous and living, it doesn’t feel like it should be part of the same question. I’d say my question is about X-risks involving death and destruction (or even mass sterilization), rather than a change in who controls the outcome.
I realize I didn’t choose a clear position on this in my description, and I’m actually not sure. I’d call a complete, seemingly irreversible collapse of civilization, even with humans remaining on earth (what the outcome of a nuclear war could be, for example), an X-risk even if it’s not full-on extinction, but when it comes to lock-in and disempowerment, since humans (and presumably other animals) remain numerous and living, it doesn’t feel like it should be part of the same question. I’d say my question is about X-risks involving death and destruction (or even mass sterilization), rather than a change in who controls the outcome.