I think we’re more limited by the number of monitoring measurements we can take and our ability to deliver specific, measured intervention at specific places and times.
This seems a bit surprising to me, as currently we don’t even have a good understanding of biology/ecology in general, and of welfare biology in particular. (which means that we need intelligence to solve these)
So, did you mean that engineering capabilities (e.g. the minotoring measurements that you mentioned) are more of a bottleneck to WAW than theoretical understanding (into welfare biology) is? If yes, could you explain the reason?
One plausible reason I can think of: When developping WAW interventions, we could use a SpaceX-style approach, i.e. doing many small-scale experiments, iterating rapidly, and learn from tight feedback loops, in a trial-and-error manner. Is that what you were having in mind?
Thanks for the explanation; I do support what SI is doing (researching problems around digital sentience as moral patients, which seems to be an important and neglected area), and your reasoning makes sense!