Recently, there’s been a very public argument about longtermism the view that we should focus large resources on humanity’s long-term future. Longtermism often focuses on trying to survive to a point at which we can transform vast quantities of matter and energy into computers and create endless quintillion simulated beings living lives of pure bliss.
Are you sure dark longtermism exists for more than a trivial number of people?
I've never heard anything like these views expressed, and my sense is that people like Thiel, or people with religious leanings, would reject longtermism outright.
The closest I've heard to what you're describing is Curtis Yarvin's pitch about why effective altruism is a waste of time - but I interpreted it as him saying it's a waste of time, not him trying to promote his own flavour of effective altruism
In stead of Nick Land's "Dark Longtermism", Yarvin's "Grey Longtermism" seems more plausible, with three being modified into: multi-polar monarchies (AI as a non-issue as organizational dominance suffers from the same problem, decentralization good), class-based planning ("Solus Populi Suprema Lex"), near future first initiatives (establish charity chain-of-causes to assess effectiveness).
The major issue is that "Left Longtermism" and "Dark Longtermism" both suffers from lack of unified sense of best-case, worse-case, and average-case scenarios, and that there should be mediation factors that tips the scales way or the other. What "bipartisan" bridges can be built then?
Are you sure dark longtermism exists for more than a trivial number of people?
I've never heard anything like these views expressed, and my sense is that people like Thiel, or people with religious leanings, would reject longtermism outright.
The closest I've heard to what you're describing is Curtis Yarvin's pitch about why effective altruism is a waste of time - but I interpreted it as him saying it's a waste of time, not him trying to promote his own flavour of effective altruism
In stead of Nick Land's "Dark Longtermism", Yarvin's "Grey Longtermism" seems more plausible, with three being modified into: multi-polar monarchies (AI as a non-issue as organizational dominance suffers from the same problem, decentralization good), class-based planning ("Solus Populi Suprema Lex"), near future first initiatives (establish charity chain-of-causes to assess effectiveness).
The major issue is that "Left Longtermism" and "Dark Longtermism" both suffers from lack of unified sense of best-case, worse-case, and average-case scenarios, and that there should be mediation factors that tips the scales way or the other. What "bipartisan" bridges can be built then?