I have edited the title in response to this comment

The methodology wasn't super robust so I didn't want to make it sound overconfident, but my best guess is that around 80% of METR employees have sub 2030 median timelines.

I encourage people to register their predictions for AI progress in the AI 2025 Forecasting Survey (https://bit.ly/ai-2025 ) before the end of the year, I've found this to be an extremely useful activity when I've done it in the past (some of the best spent hours of this year for me).

Yes, resilience seems very neglected.

I think I'm at a similar probability to nuclear war but I think the scenarios where biological weapons are used are mostly past a point of no return for humanity. I'm at 15%, most of which is scenarios where the rest of the humans are hunted down by misaligned AI and can't rebuild civilization. Nuclear weapons use would likely be mundane and for non AI-takeover reasons and would likely result in an eventual rebuilding of civilization.

The main reason I expect an AI to use bioweapons with more likelihood than nuclear weapons in a full-scale takeover is that bioweapons would do much less damage to existing infrastructure and thus allow a larger and more complex minimal seed of industrial capacity from the AI to recover from.

I'm interning there and I conducted a poll.

The median AGI timeline of more than half of METR employees is before the end of 2030.

(AGI is defined as 95% of fully remote jobs from 2023 being automatable.)

I think if the question is "what do I do with my altruistic budget," then investing some of it to cash out later (with large returns) and donate much more is a valid option (as long as you have systems in place that actually make sure that happens). At small amounts (<$10M), I think the marginal negative effects on AGI timelines and similar factors are basically negligible compared to other factors.

Thanks for your comment. It prompted me to add a section on adaptability and resilience to the post.

I sadly don't have well-developed takes here, but others have pointed out in the past that there are some funding opportunities that are systematically avoided by big funders, where small funders could make a large difference (e.g. the funding of LessWrong!). I expect more of these to pop up as time goes on. 

Somewhat obviously, the burn rate of your altruistic budget should account for altruistic donation opportunities (possibly) disappearing post-ASI, but also account for the fact that investing and cashing it out later could also increase the size of the pot. (not financial advice)

(also, I have now edited the part of the post you quote to specify that I don't just mean financial capital, I mean other forms of capital as well)

Time in bed