Thanks! Letting us play with the assumptions is a great way to develop an intuitive sensitivity analysis.

As you note, opinions differ widely, on many axes, and while I also will like to see more people's viewpoints and advice made explicit, there is really no path you can actually be confident in. In that kind of scenario, there's IMO three factors to consider.

First, which predictions resonate with you, and best withstand scrutiny from you?

Second, which paths fail most gracefully? In the event you pick wrong (and in which there was a right thing to pick), what leaves you in an acceptable position anyway?

Third, by what criteria do you wish for your actions to be judged, and which paths best align with that?

I still find that WBW post series useful to send to people, 10 years after it was published. Remarkably good work, that.

I agree with you, but would point out that the vending machine project problems have, to some degree, been fixed: see https://thezvi.substack.com/p/ai-148-christmas-break?open=false#%C2%A7show-me-the-money. I personally put a lot of weight on the idea that even an actually-not-that-weak-AGI would struggle  with many tasks at present due to how little of the scaffolding (aka the kinds of accommodations and training we'd do for a human) we've built to let it display its capabilities.

FWIW this happens all the time in both directions (the other being when a term becomes so overused as to become meaningless), and often (as, arguably, with AI today) both directions at once. My background is in materials science, and IMO this is basically what happened with terms like nanotech, metamaterials, smart materials, and 3D printing. My mental model is something like: Motte-and-bailey by people (often people not quite at the cutting edge but trying to develop a tech or product) leads to poorly researched press coverage (but I repeat myself) leads to popular disillusionment, such that the actual advances happening get quietly ignored and/or shouted down, no matter how much or how little impact they're having. Sometimes the actual rates of technological progress and commercial adoption are quite smooth, even as the level of hype and investment and other activity shift wildly around them.

These kinds of haptic feedback devices exist and got talked about a decent amount 10-15 years ago, but mostly failed to take off for a variety of reasons (I don't remember all the reasons, but cost, durability, and transparency were common ones). The first that comes to mind for me is Tactus Technology, which put a film over touchscreens that could dynamically form buttons as needed. I forget if that one was fluid based or electroactive polymer based, but I remember both existing. (EAPs are also used for vibration feedback and actuators, but in this case the idea is to deform them into a fixed shaped for as long as needed).

IIRC there was also a haptic feedback device company that talked about integrations with AR/VR and physics engines and physical modeling tools, so you could e.g. literally feel yourself moving around a digital workshop or other setting and move stuff around and interact with any materials present. Can't remember the name.

I also wish someone would pick these kinds of ideas back up.

I first encountered a similar idea in Harari's "Sapiens," that humanity's ability to coordinate at scale derives from our use of ritual to create shared belief in imagined order that allows us to act as if something is true, which belief thereby gives it its power. As an example, roughly the entire legal system consists of (in essence) sorcerers casting spells and telling stories that work because we all go along with them. It's so ingrained that we find it jarring and disturbing when people call attention to it. 

"Is this meant to be your shield, Ned Stark? A piece of paper?"

"John Marshall has made his decision, now let him enforce it."

I like the extension to normal etiquette.

I think the idea of coordinates makes a very clear link between dimensionality and algebraic variables, so I can definitely see this, yes.

Fair enough, admittedly the question was half rhetorical. In my limited experience, the text of local laws and ordinances often matters a lot less than what a few officials and committees decide they can get away with interpreting them to mean, and what your neighbors and random busybodies can get away with doing to make life unpleasant for anyone doing something they personally don't like. Half the time when I try to look up a local rule it either doesn't exist in any published form, or is barely grammatical, or conflicts with some other local rule, or changed but the change was never properly implemented, or is phrased broadly but interpreted narrowly, or is phrased narrowly but interpreted broadly. Other times, especially when renting, someone's insurance company makes up a rule that doesn't exist anywhere in code or law but gets enforced anyway.

Thanks. That's good to know. Has this diffused its way into who typical landlords and management companies are willing to rent to, and how town government agencies enforce the rules?