I think most of the value in researching timelines is in developing models that can then be quickly updated as new facts come to light. As opposed to figuring out how to think about the implications of such facts only after they become available.
People might substantially disagree about parameters of such models (and the timelines they predict) while agreeing on the overall framework, and building common understanding is important for coordination. Also, you wouldn’t necessarily a priori know which facts to track, without first having developed the models.
I think most of the value in researching timelines is in developing models that can then be quickly updated as new facts come to light. As opposed to figuring out how to think about the implications of such facts only after they become available.
People might substantially disagree about parameters of such models (and the timelines they predict) while agreeing on the overall framework, and building common understanding is important for coordination. Also, you wouldn’t necessarily a priori know which facts to track, without first having developed the models.
i super agree, i al so think that the value is in debating the models of intelligence explosion.
which is why i made my website: ai-2028.com or intexp.xyz
It seems like a bad sign that, even with maximally optimistic inputs, your model never falsely retrodicts intelligence explosions in the past.