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.
Governance first
252 endorsers · 0 opposeLead with regulation, treaties, liability regimes
expertise mix
recognition mix
profiled
53/252
mean p(doom)
35%
n=2
quotes
272
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 Governance first; negative means it's over-represented in Existential primacy.
Governance first skews these tiers
- Policy / meta+28pp
- Household name+14pp
Existential primacy skews these tiers
- Field-leading+14pp
- Frontier builder+10pp
- Commentator+10pp
endorse both (5)
Governance first only (247)