I didn’t include a US non-race timeline because I was assuming that “we” is the US and can mainly only causally influence what the US does. (This is not strictly true, but I think it’s true enough).
I read the MAGIC paper, and my impression is that it would be an international project, in which the US might play a large role. But my impression is also that MAGIC would be very willing to cause large delays in the development of TAI in order to ensure safety, which is why I added 20 years to the timeline. I think that a non-racing US would be still much faster than that, because they are less concerned with safety/less bureaucratic/willing to externalize costs on the world.
Also, the US race and PRC race shouldn’t be independent distributions. A still inaccurate but better model would be to use the same distribution for USA and then have PRC be e.g. 1 year behind +/- some normally distributed noise with mean 0 and SD 1 year.
Hm. That does sound like a much better way of modeling the situation, thanks! I’ll put it on my TODO list to change this. That would at least decrease variance, right?
I didn’t include a US non-race timeline because I was assuming that “we” is the US and can mainly only causally influence what the US does. (This is not strictly true, but I think it’s true enough).
I read the MAGIC paper, and my impression is that it would be an international project, in which the US might play a large role. But my impression is also that MAGIC would be very willing to cause large delays in the development of TAI in order to ensure safety, which is why I added 20 years to the timeline. I think that a non-racing US would be still much faster than that, because they are less concerned with safety/less bureaucratic/willing to externalize costs on the world.
Hm. That does sound like a much better way of modeling the situation, thanks! I’ll put it on my TODO list to change this. That would at least decrease variance, right?