I think I made much the same points in my DOOM! video. DOOM mongers:
tend to do things like write books about THE END OF THE WORLD—which gives them a stake in promoting the topic …and...
are a self-selected sample of those who think DOOM is very important (and so, often, highly likely) - so naturally they hold extreme views—and represent a sample from the far end of the spectrum;
clump together, cite each others papers, and enjoy a sense of community based around their unusual views.
It seems tricky for the SIAI to avoid the criticism that they have a stake in promoting the idea of DOOM—while they are funded the way they are.
Similarly, I don’t see an easy way of avoiding the criticism that they are a self-selected sample from the extreme end of a spectrum of DOOM beliefs either.
If we could independently establish p(DOOM), that would help—but measuring it seems pretty challenging.
IMO, a prize wouldn’t help much—but I don’t know for sure. Many people behave irrationally around prizes—so it is hard to be very confident here.
I gather they are working on publishing some positional documents. It seems to be a not-unreasonable move. If there is something concrete to criticise, critics will have something to get their teeth into.
They are already getting some critical feedback.
I think I made much the same points in my DOOM! video. DOOM mongers:
tend to do things like write books about THE END OF THE WORLD—which gives them a stake in promoting the topic …and...
are a self-selected sample of those who think DOOM is very important (and so, often, highly likely) - so naturally they hold extreme views—and represent a sample from the far end of the spectrum;
clump together, cite each others papers, and enjoy a sense of community based around their unusual views.
It seems tricky for the SIAI to avoid the criticism that they have a stake in promoting the idea of DOOM—while they are funded the way they are.
Similarly, I don’t see an easy way of avoiding the criticism that they are a self-selected sample from the extreme end of a spectrum of DOOM beliefs either.
If we could independently establish p(DOOM), that would help—but measuring it seems pretty challenging.
IMO, a prize wouldn’t help much—but I don’t know for sure. Many people behave irrationally around prizes—so it is hard to be very confident here.
I gather they are working on publishing some positional documents. It seems to be a not-unreasonable move. If there is something concrete to criticise, critics will have something to get their teeth into.
For the curious: DOOM!