I still feel like almost all goods are ~0 terminal value because you get OOMs more goodness by optimizing hard, and we're unlikely to produce terminal goods at large scale that are 5-95% of maximum value. (I think some experts agree and some disagree, but not sure.)
That's before accounting for acausal considerations. I think people getting acausal stuff right but having wrong values is a very plausible way to get ~50% of max value.
And I now think compromise is very plausible, where the lightcone is filled with several different goods (or, if acausal stuff works out, our lightcone is filled with goods-that-people-in-other-universes-like but we're trading for several different goods in their universes).
The binary view has been argued against by MacAskill and Assadi; I haven't read that.