I think the prior for aliens having visited Earth should be lower, since it a priori it seems unlikely to me that aliens would interact with Earth but not to an extent which makes it clear to us that they have. My intuition is that its probably rare to get to other planets with sapient life before building a superintelligence (which would almost certainly be obvious to us if it did arrive) and even if you do manage to go to other planets with sapient life, I don't think aliens would not try to contract us if they're anything like humans.

I think the thing that actually makes people more rational is thinking of them as principles you can apply to your own life rather than abstract notions, which is hard to communicate in a Wikipedia page about Dutch books.

Emmett Shear might also count, but he might merely be rationalist-adjacent.

IMO trying the problem yourself before researching it makes you appreciate what other people have already done even more. It's pretty easy to fall victim to hindsight bias if you haven't experienced the difficulty of actually getting anywhere.

they figure out planting and then rationally collaborate with each other?

I feel like they would end up converging on the same problems that plague human sociality.

I think asociality might prevent the development of altruistic ethics.

Also it's hard to see how an asocial species would develop civilization.

This reminds me of Moravec's paradox.

You should read Greg Egan's excellent novel Permutation City.

I think working on safety roles at capabilities orgs is mostly mutually exclusive with a pause, so I don't think this is that remarkable.