That was quite a rant!

'haha let's be cynical and assume the worst of the people that are actually trying their hardest to do the most good they can for the world'.

I hope I don't come across as thinking "the worst" about those involved. I expect they are all very nice and sincere. By way of comparison, not all cults have deliberately exploitative ringleaders.

One might naively expect such an organization would typically act so as to exaggerate the risks - but SIAI doesn't seem to be doing that so one's naive expectations would be wrong.

Really? Really? You actually think the level of DOOM is cold realism - and not a ploy to attract funding? Why do you think that? De Garis and Warwick were doing much the same kind of attention-seeking before the SIAI came along - DOOM is an old school of marketing in the field.

You encourage me to speculate about the motives of the individuals involved. While that might be fun, it doesn't seem to matter much - the SIAI itself is evidently behaving as though it wants dollars, attention, and manpower - to help it meet its aims.

FWIW, I don't see what I am saying as particularly "contrarian". A lot of people would be pretty sceptical about the end of the world being nigh - or the idea that a bug might take over the world - or the idea that a bunch of saintly programmers will be the ones to save us all. Maybe contrary to the ideas of the true believers - if that is what you mean.

Anyway, the basic point is that if you are interested in DOOM, or p(DOOM), consulting a DOOM-mongering organisation, that wants your dollars to help them SAVE THE WORLD may not be your best move. The "follow the money" principle is simple - and often produces good results.