Note that the type of forecasting required here is not just state forecasting (predicting what will happen), but counterfactual forecasting (predicting what would happen if an intervention is carried out). While a fair amount of research has been carried out on state forecasting, counterfactual forecasting is much less well understood. And it may be a whole lot more tricky to do.
I just want to highlight that I think that counterfactual forecasting and its distinction from state forecasting are important and under-discussed topics (I’m grateful to Dave Rhys Bernard for making it salient to me in the past), even outside the context of the washing out hypothesis, long-range forecasting, or longtermism. So it’s nice to see you highlight this here :)
We can also show that RV is increasing in α (see proof). This captures one of the key features of the washing out hypothesis. When α is higher, the future becomes less predictable more rapidly as we extend our time horizon further, meaning that longtermist interventions are less appealing compared to near termist interventions. [emphasis added]
I just want to highlight that I think that counterfactual forecasting and its distinction from state forecasting are important and under-discussed topics (I’m grateful to Dave Rhys Bernard for making it salient to me in the past), even outside the context of the washing out hypothesis, long-range forecasting, or longtermism. So it’s nice to see you highlight this here :)
Should that say “RV is decreasing in α ”?
Yes indeed, kudos to Dave Bernard—he pointed out this distinction to me as well.
And good spot—sorry for the confusing error! I’ve now edited this in the text.