taw comments on Optimal Philanthropy for Human Beings - Less Wrong

36 Post author: lukeprog 25 July 2011 07:27AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (86)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: taw 26 July 2011 05:40:29AM 4 points [-]

You actually need to detect these asteroids decades in advance for our current technology to stand any chance, and we currently don't do that. More detection efforts mean tracking smaller asteroids than otherwise, but more importantly tracking big asteroids faster.

Arbitrarily massive asteroid can be moved off course very easily given enough time to do so. That's the plan, not "destroying" them.

Comment author: MatthewBaker 26 July 2011 05:50:56AM 2 points [-]

Still, considering there's a very low chance of a large asteroid strike and most the most quoted figure Ive heard is that we have more than 75% of NEO objects that are of dangerous size being tracked. I think a negative singularity is more likely to happen in the next 200 years then an asteroid strike. However, it is a good point that donating money to NEO tracking could be a good charitable donation as well i just don't think its on the same order of magnitude as the danger of a uFAI.

Comment author: taw 27 July 2011 05:15:54AM 6 points [-]

With asteroid strike everybody agrees on risk within order of magnitude or two. We have a lot of historical data about asteroid strikes of various sizes, can use power level distribution to smooth it a bit etc.

With UFAI people's estimate are about as divergent as with Second Coming of Jesus Christ, ranging from impossible even in theory through essentially impossible all the way to almost certain.

Comment author: nazgulnarsil 28 July 2011 09:25:06PM -1 points [-]

Money spent on mind uploading is a better defense against asteroids than asteroid detection. At least for me.