I think this post shifts the burden to risk-concerned folks and only justifies that risk with its own poor analogies. 7/10 of the analogy-makers you cite here have pdooms <=50%, so they are only aiming for plausibility. You admit that the analogies point to the "logical possibility" of stark misalignment, but one person's logical possibility is another person's plausibility.
To give an example, Golden Retrievers are much more cherry-picked than Cotra's lion/chimpanzee examples. Of all the species on Earth, the ones we've successfully domesticated ...
Maybe I’m fighting the premise, but it seems like these scenarios require commitment mechanisms on the part of the people choosing isolation that are stronger than the ones I think they’d agree to or be effectively bound by over long periods.
Scarcity will still exist in some form and it seems like one freedom almost anyone would opt into is the freedom to be aware of and have any contact with the outside world at all (at least by some members of the group). On the other side, it seems like you’d have very powerful forces in the broader world with an inter... (read more)