= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
NancyLebovitz comments on 2012 Survey Results - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (640)
I think I went for political/economic collapse, but with no very great certainty. This is probably a question which could lead to some interesting discussion.
Wiping out 90% or so of the human race without killing everyone seems unlikely in general. It wasn't on the list, but I'd probably go for infrastructure disaster-- something which could include more than one of the listed items.
I don't know about 90% of the human race, but after the recent tunnel collapse in Japan, I think infrastructure disaster is looking a lot more likely, or possibly slow, grinding infrastructure failure.
You could make a case that too much is taken by elites, or that too much is given away, but I think the big problem is that building is fun and maintenance is boring.