I think it's likely that calibration is domain-specific, so I'm not sure I buy this unless the calibration has occurred in the same domain, which is rare/impossible for the domains we're talking about.
I think you can argue that the probability is inherently unknowable but I don't see how a detailed process is much better than an intuitive process.
It's very useful to have a mental ability to distinguish between 0.01, 0.001 and 0.0001 when it comes to thinking about XRisk events. I don't think that it's a good practice to call all of those events unlikely and avoiding to make semantic distinctions between them.
It's very useful to have a mental ability to distinguish between 0.01, 0.001 and 0.0001 when it comes to thinking about XRisk events. I don't think that it's a good practice to call all of those events unlikely and avoiding to make semantic distinctions between them.
But how do you arrive at them? Intuition doesn't deal with 0.01 and 0.00001. Intuition deals with vague notions of likely and unlikely, which also change depends on what you ate for lunch and the phase of the moon. IOW, your intuition is useless to me unless I can confirm it myself. (But then it's not intuition anymore.)
If it's worth saying, but not worth its own post (even in Discussion), then it goes here.