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.
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
AI skeptic
81 endorsers · 2 opposeAGI risk narratives overstated; real harms are mundane and current
expertise mix
recognition mix
profiled
35/81
mean p(doom)
0%
n=1
quotes
97
where the disagreement lives
Tier shares within profiled endorsers. Positive shift means the tier is over-represented in Existential primacy; negative means it's over-represented in AI skeptic.
Existential primacy skews these tiers
- Policy / meta+19pp
- Frontier builder+16pp
- Established+11pp
AI skeptic skews these tiers
- Deep technical+32pp
- External-domain expert+11pp
- Household name+7pp
endorse both (1)
Existential primacy only (75)