•I think that the relevant distribution here is a log-normal distribution; this won’t involve billions of deaths because it’s strictly positive.
•Even if the outcome of an asteroid strike program is essentially binary there’s still uncertainty as to how likely it will be successfully implemented, how likely it is to avert an asteroid strike assuming that it’s implemented properly, and the likelihood of humanity surviving independently of the asteroid strike issue.
•An asteroid strike prevention program has the downside of diverting skilled labor. This may seem negligible by comparison with the upside, but the fact that the probability of impact is so small makes things less clear.
•At the level of the individual donor there’s the issue of fungibility and counterfactuals (is funding an asteroid strike prevention program replacing dollars that someone else would otherwise have used to fund it? If so, what are they doing with the money instead? Is this use of money replacing that of a third person’s dollars? If so, what is that third person doing instead? etc.)
These things all point in the direction of having the distribution of expected value attached to funding an asteroid strike prevention program being more diffuse than it may seem at first blush.
•I think that the relevant distribution here is a log-normal distribution; this won’t involve billions of deaths because it’s strictly positive.
•Even if the outcome of an asteroid strike program is essentially binary there’s still uncertainty as to how likely it will be successfully implemented, how likely it is to avert an asteroid strike assuming that it’s implemented properly, and the likelihood of humanity surviving independently of the asteroid strike issue.
•An asteroid strike prevention program has the downside of diverting skilled labor. This may seem negligible by comparison with the upside, but the fact that the probability of impact is so small makes things less clear.
•At the level of the individual donor there’s the issue of fungibility and counterfactuals (is funding an asteroid strike prevention program replacing dollars that someone else would otherwise have used to fund it? If so, what are they doing with the money instead? Is this use of money replacing that of a third person’s dollars? If so, what is that third person doing instead? etc.)
These things all point in the direction of having the distribution of expected value attached to funding an asteroid strike prevention program being more diffuse than it may seem at first blush.