Stagnation → reduced existential risk is not a well-established fact. Our ability to cope with technologies that would be more delayed in stagnation can go down as well as up, stagnation will not affect all technologies equally and can skew the distribution worse, and there are other risks in the meantime. Not to mention that one ought to be very cautious about framing progress as a problem when there is so much chance of a false-positive, as opposed to framing things as an investigative/research question.
might support a “Manhattan project” that dumps a trillion dollars into a scientific goal, increasing the risk of UFAI.
Why think that this increases the risk of UFAI, relative to the expected distribution of development in industry, academia, or nonprofits absent such a project?
Again I’m not sure why this is down voted. This was a political discussion after all and Republicans really haven’t mentioned any restrictions on high skilled immigration at all.
Is it really so impolite to point out that fruit pickers and start up founders mostly come from different pools?
Democrats are more likely raise taxes on tech startups, which reduces the incentives to create new (possibly dangerous) AI.
Republicans are more likely to approve of immigration restrictions, which also slows development.
Either side might support a “Manhattan project” that dumps a trillion dollars into a scientific goal, increasing the risk of UFAI.
Iran could go either way. Republicans were more war-mongering and more Zionist last decade, but Democrats are catching up.
Democrats are more likely to take the risk of a global pandemic seriously.
If its a foreign plague I actually expect Republicans be better at quarantine.
Stagnation → reduced existential risk is not a well-established fact. Our ability to cope with technologies that would be more delayed in stagnation can go down as well as up, stagnation will not affect all technologies equally and can skew the distribution worse, and there are other risks in the meantime. Not to mention that one ought to be very cautious about framing progress as a problem when there is so much chance of a false-positive, as opposed to framing things as an investigative/research question.
Why think that this increases the risk of UFAI, relative to the expected distribution of development in industry, academia, or nonprofits absent such a project?
Not on high skilled immigrants.
But they demonize the pharmaceutical industry which provides our best defense against pandemics.
Again I’m not sure why this is down voted. This was a political discussion after all and Republicans really haven’t mentioned any restrictions on high skilled immigration at all.
Is it really so impolite to point out that fruit pickers and start up founders mostly come from different pools?
Our best defense against pandemics would be to raise oil prices. Fighting travel that allows illnesses to spread rapidly.
.