The notion of a new intelligent species being dangerous is actually quite intuitive, and quite different from climate change. Climate change is more like arguing for the risks of more-or-less aligned AGI—complex, debatable, and non-intuitive. One reason I like this strategy is that it does not conflate the two.
The relevant bit of the climate crisis to learn from in that series is: don’t create polarization unless the decision-makers mostly sit on one side of the polarizing line. Polarization is the mind-killer.
The notion of a new intelligent species being dangerous is actually quite intuitive, and quite different from climate change. Climate change is more like arguing for the risks of more-or-less aligned AGI—complex, debatable, and non-intuitive. One reason I like this strategy is that it does not conflate the two.
The relevant bit of the climate crisis to learn from in that series is: don’t create polarization unless the decision-makers mostly sit on one side of the polarizing line. Polarization is the mind-killer.