In summary, if you begin with some uncertainty about whether we precede an AI explosion, then updating on the observed large total filter and accepting SIA should make you much less confident in that outcome.
The utility of an anthropic approach to this issue seems questionable, though. The great silence tells something—something rather depressing—it is true… but it is far from our only relevant source of information on the topic. We have an impressive mountain of other information to consider and update on.
To give but one example, we don’t yet see any trace of independently-evolved micro-organisms on other planets. The less evidence for independent origins of life elsewhere there is, the more that suggests a substantial early filter—and the less need there is for a late one.
This is true—but because it does not suggest THE END OF THE WORLD—it is not so newsworthy. Selective reporting favours apocalyptic elements. Seeing only the evidence supporting one side of such stories seems likely to lead to people adopting a distorted world view, with inacurate estimates of the risks.
This summary seems fairly accurate:
The utility of an anthropic approach to this issue seems questionable, though. The great silence tells something—something rather depressing—it is true… but it is far from our only relevant source of information on the topic. We have an impressive mountain of other information to consider and update on.
To give but one example, we don’t yet see any trace of independently-evolved micro-organisms on other planets. The less evidence for independent origins of life elsewhere there is, the more that suggests a substantial early filter—and the less need there is for a late one.
This is true—but because it does not suggest THE END OF THE WORLD—it is not so newsworthy. Selective reporting favours apocalyptic elements. Seeing only the evidence supporting one side of such stories seems likely to lead to people adopting a distorted world view, with inacurate estimates of the risks.