“In partial defence of p(doom)” by Mikhail Samin

p(doom) is a shorthand for some important bits and a way to notice a disagreement to double-crux about. If you work on AI capabilities at a frontier AI company, I might ask you for your p(doom). If it's less than 1%, I know that you're probably not familiar with the arguments, or you're maybe dumb in some ways, and will sometimes talk to you about what the situation really is. If it is 80%, I know I should talk to you about the actions people in your position should be taking; we have disagreements about best ways of achieving goals/lab politics/etc., not about the large-picture situation. p(doom) is not a very useful number to talk about in a conversation between two aspiring rationalists generally familiar with the basics. The things people should talk about instead are: How does the world survive? How likely are different things to happen in the future, maybe given that other things happen? etc. But most people are not aspiring rationalists, and have never heard of any of our arguments, and are not aware of the levels of worry of various people in the field. Communicating the importance of paying attention to the arguments by [...] --- First published: June 30th, 2026 Source: https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/bXpJC92QREfWgabcw/in-partial-defence-of-p-doom --- Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO. ---Images from the article:Apple Podcasts and Spotify do not show images in the episode description. Try Pocket Casts, or another podcast app.