How much should you optimize for the short-timelines scenario?

By SoerenMind @ 2022-07-26T15:51 (+39)

(x-posted on LW

Some have argued that one should tend to act as if timelines are short since in that scenario it's possible to have more expected impact. But I haven't seen a thorough analysis of this argument.

Question: Is this argument valid? And if yes how strong do you think it is? 

The basic argument seems to be: if timelines are short, the field (AI alignment) will be relatively smaller and have made less progress. So you can pick more low-hanging fruits that wouldn't otherwise be picked.

The question affects career decisions. For example, if you optimize for long timelines, you can invest more time into yourself and delay your impact.

The question interacts with the following questions in somewhat unclear ways:

If someone would like to seriously research the overall question, please reach out. The right candidate can get funding.


Pablo @ 2022-07-26T16:45 (+26)

In my opinion, the best discussion of the optimal temporal allocation of work aimed at reducing existential risk is to be found in these two essays:

Cotton-Barratt, Owen (2015) Allocating risk mitigation across time, technical report #2015-2, Future of Humanity Institute.

Ord, Toby (2014) The timing of labour aimed at reducing existential risk, Future of Humanity Institute, July 3.

SoerenMind @ 2022-07-27T18:14 (+12)

Those definitely help, thanks! Any additional answers are still useful and I don't want to discourage answers from people who haven't read the above. For example we may have learned some empirical things since these analyses came out.