[ExI] Inevitability of the Singularity (was Re: To Max, re Natasha and Extropy (Kevin Haskell)

[Kelly Anderson]

On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 8:45 AM, Eugen Leitl <eugen at leitl.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 01:34:36PM +0200, Stefano Vaj wrote:
> Even low-probability events are worth hedging against if the outcome
> amplitude is large enough.

True, if the cost of hedging is reasonable. For example, a few million
dollars a year does a lot to hedge against asteroid impact. A few tens
of millions of dollars a year keeps an eye on all the volcanoes on
earth. But to put a dent in CO2 concentrations using any currently
suggested methodology will cost tens of trillions of dollars and may
not even help much.

Hedge yes. Commit mutual economic suicide. I vote NO!

> I have serious issues with people dismissing some potential
> two billion loss to starvation and war as no big deal.

It isn't so much that it is a small thing, it's just the sort of thing
we have solved on a regular basis for many years in the face of many
threats. How much did we spend in WWII to solve the Hitler problem? A
lot. We had a big problem and we solved it. If global warming becomes
as big an issue as Hitler's Germany, we will then apply the resources
necessary to overcome the problem. By then, however, it may be very
late to do anything useful. However, we'll have a lot more
intellectual resources to attack the problem than we do now.

> Extremely unlikely stability. We're up to our ears in alligators for the
> foreseeable future.

We have enjoyed unusual climatic stability in the last 10,000 years.
It is unreasonable to assume that would continue forever in any
case...

In Risk assessment, you address the risks in order of ((threat
potential damage * threat probability) / cost to address). Global
warming doesn't come close to the top 20 global risks when you apply
this formula. For example, the threat of dirty water is a daily
reality in the lives of about a billion people. The cost to fix that
problem is approximately 20 billion dollars, world wide. The
probability of the problem is 1. So this is a threat we should address
immediately, aggressively. Likewise, malaria. See the activities of
the the Gates foundation.

-Kelly