4 ms·

Industrial food production is quite fragile, and the world basically has yet to experience that production in any sort of "failure mode," e.g. global blight due

Industrial food production is quite fragile, and the world basically has yet to experience that production in any sort of "failure mode," e.g. global blight due to excessive monocultures. The probability of such a global failure occurring within the next 100 years strikes me as near 1.0, and thus possibly more pressing than any of the events listed above.

jessriedel 16y ago
This isn't an existential risk.
- indrax 16y ago
  If there is a significant die-off in industrial nations it could lead to a major delay in the singularity, perhaps making it impossible altogether. http://www.nickbostrom.com/existential/risks.html http://www.nickbostrom.com/existential/risks.html In these terms this could be a 'crunch'.
  - jessriedel 16y ago
    Importance-wise, delays in the singularity are trivial compared to a risk of it not happening at all. So suppose we are worried that a die-off in industrial nations will actually make it impossible. Isn't this risk (that there is a major catastrophic disaster for industrialized nations and this disaster prevents a singularity from ever taking place) much smaller than the risk that the singularity goes badly when it happens? If so, then this supports the spirit of my original comment: worrying about the singularity going well is more pressing than worrying about major shocks to civilization which do not completely wipe out humanity.
  - jessriedel 16y ago
    The badness of a delayed singularity is insignificant to the badness of it never happening. So let's consider the latter. Isn't the risk that a large industrial collapse happens and it prevents a singularity from ever taking place much smaller than the risk that the singularity goes badly? If so, then this agrees with the spirit of my comment: worrying about the singularity going well is much more pressing than worrying about catastrophes that do not immediately wipe out humanity.

jessriedel 16y ago

This isn't an existential risk.

indrax 16y ago
If there is a significant die-off in industrial nations it could lead to a major delay in the singularity, perhaps making it impossible altogether. http://www.nickbostrom.com/existential/risks.html http://www.nickbostrom.com/existential/risks.html In these terms this could be a 'crunch'.
- jessriedel 16y ago
  Importance-wise, delays in the singularity are trivial compared to a risk of it not happening at all. So suppose we are worried that a die-off in industrial nations will actually make it impossible. Isn't this risk (that there is a major catastrophic disaster for industrialized nations and this disaster prevents a singularity from ever taking place) much smaller than the risk that the singularity goes badly when it happens? If so, then this supports the spirit of my original comment: worrying about the singularity going well is more pressing than worrying about major shocks to civilization which do not completely wipe out humanity.
- jessriedel 16y ago
  The badness of a delayed singularity is insignificant to the badness of it never happening. So let's consider the latter. Isn't the risk that a large industrial collapse happens and it prevents a singularity from ever taking place much smaller than the risk that the singularity goes badly? If so, then this agrees with the spirit of my comment: worrying about the singularity going well is much more pressing than worrying about catastrophes that do not immediately wipe out humanity.