An analogy: “let’s not build below sea level” is more robust than “intricate dyke system vulnerable to catastrophic failure.”
I am not sure that’s true. Consider a similar analogy: “let’s not develop agriculture” is more robust than “dependence on fickle weather or intricate irrigation system”. Is that so? Not likely—you just get hit by a different set of risks. One day a lot of pale people with thundersticks appear, they kill your men and herd women and children into reservations to die.
Given the fate of the societies which did not climb the technological tree sufficiently fast, I’d say throttling down progress sure doesn’t look like a wise choice.
Given the fate of the societies which did not climb the technological tree sufficiently fast, I’d say throttling down progress sure doesn’t look like a wise choice.
I completely agree, that’s a great point! The sixth one, to be exact.
Being willing to take on greater existential risks will definitely help in short- or medium-term competition, as your example shows (greater risk of famine in exchange for ability to conquer other societies). So no, I don’t think we can necessarily coordinate to avoid a “brittle” situation in which we are vulnerable to catastrophic failure. That doesn’t mean it’s not desirable.
I am not sure that’s true. Consider a similar analogy: “let’s not develop agriculture” is more robust than “dependence on fickle weather or intricate irrigation system”. Is that so? Not likely—you just get hit by a different set of risks. One day a lot of pale people with thundersticks appear, they kill your men and herd women and children into reservations to die.
Given the fate of the societies which did not climb the technological tree sufficiently fast, I’d say throttling down progress sure doesn’t look like a wise choice.
I completely agree, that’s a great point! The sixth one, to be exact.
Being willing to take on greater existential risks will definitely help in short- or medium-term competition, as your example shows (greater risk of famine in exchange for ability to conquer other societies). So no, I don’t think we can necessarily coordinate to avoid a “brittle” situation in which we are vulnerable to catastrophic failure. That doesn’t mean it’s not desirable.