So I was mostly reading along and nodding until I got to this one for AI:
It also has 25% of 1k deaths or $200b damage by 2032
Not that I disagree, I’d just want to point out that one way this resolves to “yes” is “Self-driving cars replace most human-driven cars and are 1000x safer.”
I’m probably just being nitpicky, though, since everything else I see indicates the people involved know what the question was intended to mean and analyzed accordingly.
So I was mostly reading along and nodding until I got to this one for AI:
Not that I disagree, I’d just want to point out that one way this resolves to “yes” is “Self-driving cars replace most human-driven cars and are 1000x safer.”
I’m probably just being nitpicky, though, since everything else I see indicates the people involved know what the question was intended to mean and analyzed accordingly.
To nitpick on your nitpick, in the US, 1000x safer would be 42 deaths yearly. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_vehicle_fatality_rate_in_U.S._by_year
For the whole world, it would just be above 1k. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_traffic-related_death_rate#List, but 2032 seems like an ambitious deadline for that.
In addition, it does seem against the spirit of the question to resolve positively solely because of reducing traffic deaths.