I don’t “know” that it will succeed. However, I know the odds of success will be much higher. Are you claiming it can never succeed?
The second point is not relevant to the discussion, because the discussion is about the existence of alternate scenarios which are higher global utility. An implementable path of execution is not required for their discussion. Specifically, this is a discussion about the utility of leaving NK as it is, compared to a particular alternate future that I claim has higher net utility. Requiring that I lay out and define an error proof path to get there which takes into account other possible scenarios of your design is well outside of bounds, and if you wish to require that, I’ll politely excuse myself.
However, I know the odds of success will be much higher.
Well, how high? Did we get from 0.01% to 0.1%? Or did we get from 5% to 50%?
On the basis of what do you estimate the odds of success?
the discussion is about the existence of alternate scenarios which are higher global utility. An implementable path of execution is not required for their discussion.
Huh? So, um, you’re talking about fantasy worlds, ones which you can’t get to?
My point is that your “alternate future” has serious side-effects which you should not ignore while estimating its global utility. I think that your claim of “higher net utility” is mistaken.
I strongly disagree.
How do you know that after multiple decades and “proper” resources you will succeed?
I don’t “know” that it will succeed. However, I know the odds of success will be much higher. Are you claiming it can never succeed?
The second point is not relevant to the discussion, because the discussion is about the existence of alternate scenarios which are higher global utility. An implementable path of execution is not required for their discussion. Specifically, this is a discussion about the utility of leaving NK as it is, compared to a particular alternate future that I claim has higher net utility. Requiring that I lay out and define an error proof path to get there which takes into account other possible scenarios of your design is well outside of bounds, and if you wish to require that, I’ll politely excuse myself.
Well, how high? Did we get from 0.01% to 0.1%? Or did we get from 5% to 50%?
On the basis of what do you estimate the odds of success?
Huh? So, um, you’re talking about fantasy worlds, ones which you can’t get to?
My point is that your “alternate future” has serious side-effects which you should not ignore while estimating its global utility. I think that your claim of “higher net utility” is mistaken.