If you ask them if they are short the market, most will say there is no way to short the apocalypse. But you can benefit from waiting signs of early deterioration. At the very least, you can short some markets, or go long, and send that profit to Somalia to ease the suffering for a few years before the rest of the world ends.
However, in a recent informal discussion at the amazing Roots of Progress conference in Berkeley, many abolitionists insisted to me that the “end” will come as a complete surprise, due to the (supposed) manipulation abilities of AGI.
But notice what they say. If the markets don’t fall at least a little early, it means the passage of time, and the events that continue, won’t convince anyone. They say that further consideration of their arguments will not influence any small investors, whether directly or indirectly. They predict that their ideas will no longer spread.
I take those as signs of a weak argument. “It will never be more convincing than what you are right now!” “There are many proofs of my argument, and there will be no more!” Of course, by now most intelligent North Americans who are interested in these issues have heard these arguments and are strongly disagreed.
There is also a funny epistemic angle here. If the next person says that twenty years of proof and argument won’t convince the other side, why should you hold this view now? What do you know, that can withstand the distribution and persuasion during the next twenty years?
I would say that asking such questions is answering.
Source link