AGI safety and losing electricity/industry resilience cost-effectiveness

Abstract

Extreme solar storms, high-altitude electromagnetic pulses, and coordinated cyberattacks could disrupt regional or global electricity. Since electricity drives industry, industrial civilization could collapse without it. This could cause anthropological civilization (cities) to collapse, from which humanity might not recover, having long-term consequences. This paper analyzes the cost-effectiveness of interventions that could improve the long-term outcome given catastrophes that disrupt electricity/industry, such as solar storm, high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP), narrow AI computer virus, and extreme pandemic. Cost-effectiveness is compared to a slightly modified AGI safety cost-effectiveness model. Two different cost-effectiveness estimates for losing industry interventions were developed: one based on a poll at EA Global San Francisco 2018, and the other by Anders Sandberg at Future of Humanity Institute. There is great uncertainty in both AGI safety and interventions for losing industry. However, the models have ~99% confidence that funding interventions for losing industry now is more cost effective than additional funding for AGI safety beyond the expected ~$3 billion. Overall, AGI safety is more important and more total money should be spent on it. The modeling concludes that additional funding would be justified on both causes even for the present generation. – AI-generated abstract.