Agree that probably an overly large portion of group attention is on this number. Agree that changes to p(doom) are not generally very interesting or worthwhile.
However p(doom) convos in general have some notable upsides that seem missing here:
It doesn’t let policymakers, alignment researchers, engineers or others improve their decision-making, or help them in anticipating the future.
Seems overstated, I would take very very different actions if I had a p(doom) below 20%, because those worlds have a different set of major bottlenecks.
Strongly agree on exchanging gears models being the actually useful thing, but find that hearing someone’s p(doom) is an excellent shortcut to which gears they have and are likely missing, to shape the conversation.
Agree that probably an overly large portion of group attention is on this number. Agree that changes to p(doom) are not generally very interesting or worthwhile.
However p(doom) convos in general have some notable upsides that seem missing here:
Seems overstated, I would take very very different actions if I had a p(doom) below 20%, because those worlds have a different set of major bottlenecks.
Strongly agree on exchanging gears models being the actually useful thing, but find that hearing someone’s p(doom) is an excellent shortcut to which gears they have and are likely missing, to shape the conversation.