compare
Two strategies, side by side.
Pick any two strategies. See who endorses each, the tier mix of endorsers, the p(doom) distribution, and which people endorse both. Useful for asking are these strategies actually opposed, or does this disagreement live in builders, in policy, or in the public square.
Stance defaults to live engagement: endorses, mixed, conditional, or evolved-toward. These are people who treat the strategy as a live bet of theirs at any time. Opposers are listed separately.
Alignment first
102 endorsers · 0 opposeSolve technical alignment before capability thresholds close
expertise mix
recognition mix
profiled
29/102
mean p(doom)
35%
n=3
quotes
112
Existential primacy
76 endorsers · 0 opposeExtinction/disempowerment risk overrides ordinary cost-benefit
expertise mix
recognition mix
profiled
52/76
mean p(doom)
28%
n=11
quotes
110
where the disagreement lives
Tier shares within profiled endorsers. Positive shift means the tier is over-represented in Alignment first; negative means it's over-represented in Existential primacy.
Alignment first skews these tiers
- Deep technical+37pp
- Established+24pp
Existential primacy skews these tiers
- Policy / meta+15pp
- Household name+14pp
- Field-leading+10pp
- Commentator+10pp
endorse both (5)
Alignment first only (97)