It has been endorsed by Robin Hanson, Carl Shulman, and Nick Bostrom.
The article you cite for Shulman and Bostrom does not endorse the SIA-doomsday argument. It describes it, but:
Doesn’t take a stance on the SIA; it does an analysis of alternatives including SIA
Argues that the interaction with the Simulation Argument changes the conclusion of the Fermi Paradox SIA Doomsday argument given the assumption of SIA.
Thanks for the correction! I changed “endorsed” to “discussed” in the OP. What I meant to convey was that these authors endorsed the logic of the argument given the premises (ignoring sim scenarios), rather than that they agreed with the argument all things considered.
The article you cite for Shulman and Bostrom does not endorse the SIA-doomsday argument. It describes it, but:
Doesn’t take a stance on the SIA; it does an analysis of alternatives including SIA
Argues that the interaction with the Simulation Argument changes the conclusion of the Fermi Paradox SIA Doomsday argument given the assumption of SIA.
Thanks for the correction! I changed “endorsed” to “discussed” in the OP. What I meant to convey was that these authors endorsed the logic of the argument given the premises (ignoring sim scenarios), rather than that they agreed with the argument all things considered.
Thanks Brian.