“Why are longtermists so much less focused on human extinction than they used to be?” by Michelle_Hutchinson

Tldr; EAs seem more focused on non-extinction risks from AI than they used to be I haven’t seen much discussion of why, making reference to the very longrun Changes in the world this might be responding to are: alignment seeming more promising than it used to, the speed of AI progress, and concerns around US governance. There are also plausible sociological reasons for the shift, so I feel unsure how far to update What's the change and why care about it? My sense is that there's been a significant shift in how much longtermists prioritise non-extinction risks over the last few years. A decade ago people who were trying to ensure the flourishing of the universe trillions of years from now were very often focused on avoiding events that would kill all humans. My sense is that now they’re much more often focused on situations which they don’t think pose a risk of human extinction, such as extreme power concentration. This change has felt confusing to me for a couple of reasons: There's reasonably little written about why longtermists should change their prioritisation in this direction. The notable exception is this paper by Will MacAskill. To [...] --- Outline: (00:40) What's the change and why care about it? (03:23) Differences in the world that motivate the change (05:45) How much of an update should we make? --- First published: May 19th, 2026 Source: --- Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO .