I haven’t read most of the post. But in the first few paragraphs, you mention how he was ranting, and you interpret that as an upward update on the risk of AI extinction:
The fact that this is the post we got, as opposed to a different (in many ways better) post, is a reflection of the fact that our Earth is failing to understand what we are facing. It is failing to look the problem in the eye, let alone make real attempts at solutions.
But that’s extremely weak evidence. People rant all the time, including while being incorrect. Him formatting a message as a rant isn’t evidence of an increased risk of doom compared to yesterday, unless you already agree with him.
I haven’t read most of the post. But in the first few paragraphs, you mention how he was ranting, and you interpret that as an upward update on the risk of AI extinction:
But that’s extremely weak evidence. People rant all the time, including while being incorrect. Him formatting a message as a rant isn’t evidence of an increased risk of doom compared to yesterday, unless you already agree with him.
It’s the last bit I think that explains why Zvi thinks the ranting is itself evidence.