An issue with this is that the average person doesn't understand the AI labs' position of "we think this might kill everyone, but we're building it anyway because we think our competitors would be even more likely to kill everyone if they got there first". Given that, saying "we think our product might cause human extinction" probably sounds bizarre or like hype. The linked post could explain this though.
I agree with the general thrust of this, but posit that (for most people reading LessWrong) it is better to pick several hills to defend gently than one hill to die on.
I am atheist—I think it very unlikely that gods exist or that the supernatural claims of any religion are true. Nevertheless, I have basically positive affect toward religion; I grew up singing in choirs that met in the local Episcopal church, enjoy Scott Alexander's writing on Judaism, think Buddhism has interesting psychological insights, and so on. I think it's an advantage to me that I f... (read more)
I vibecoded a Thunderbird extension to do this: https://github.com/crtep/seriate. It's cobbled-together but so far pretty good for clearing backlogs of mostly-junk emails.
Hm. I think this is trying to fit a wide range of interactions into a framework of
Another example might be: i... (read more)