Existential Risk in Silicon Valley: Myths vs. Reality

The Disconnect Between Perceived and Real Existential Threats

Over the past year, concerns regarding existential risk have become increasingly prevalent. A noticeable surge in sales of survival supplies, ranging from food provisions to fortified shelters, has been observed. Furthermore, discussions surrounding potential civilizational collapse are now commonplace.

However, a significant disparity exists between the perceived dangers of existential threats and the speculative focus often found within technology circles.

Speculative vs. Mundane Risks in Tech

Within Silicon Valley, discussions frequently center on hypothetical scenarios. These include engineered pathogens designed for targeted assassinations, or even the complete eradication of humanity from a small laboratory setting. The acronym CRISPR is often invoked to add a layer of technical complexity.

Coronal mass ejections and electromagnetic pulses, capable of disrupting global power grids, are also common topics. Hacking scenarios, where vulnerabilities in global chip infrastructure could be exploited, are frequently considered, drawing inspiration from incidents like Meltdown and Spectre.

These scenarios, while imaginative, often serve as engaging conversation starters. They provide a diversion from everyday professional discussions.

Recent events have highlighted a cognitive bias: a tendency to overemphasize speculative dangers while underestimating the more commonplace, yet equally threatening, civilizational risks.

Recent "Boring" Disasters

The COVID-19 pandemic serves as a prime example of a predicted, yet devastating, “boring” disaster. However, it is not an isolated incident.

The widespread power outages in Texas last month, occurring during a period of extreme cold, demonstrated vulnerability without the need for an electromagnetic attack. Similarly, California’s increasingly severe wildfire seasons have resulted in loss of life, extensive power disruptions, and significant financial damages – all without relying on Hollywood-style special effects.

A “software issue” caused a substantial internet outage along the East Coast in January. Meanwhile, a bombing in Nashville disrupted telecommunications across the metropolitan area during the Christmas holidays.

Limited Scope, Not Total Collapse

These events, while disruptive, have been limited in both duration and geographical scope. Power outages affected Texas and California, not the entire world. Internet access was lost in specific regions, not globally. Civilization itself did not collapse; rather, the pandemic necessitated temporary closures of schools and businesses to control viral spread.

It’s almost as if a disaster doesn’t register unless essential services like Netflix remain operational for a portion of the population.

While discussions revolve around artificial general intelligence, the singularity, and even colonizing Mars, the immediate threat lies in the potential failure of thousands of aging dams. Such failures could result in the loss of millions of lives, as predicted by structural engineers.

Cognitive Routing Around Catastrophe

There’s a growing tendency to normalize these everyday catastrophes. AWS outages, once met with strong criticism, are now often treated as minor inconveniences. Power outages are becoming increasingly commonplace. Even pandemic precautions, like mask-wearing, are being abandoned despite the emergence of new variants.

As one colleague remarked, the suggestion to purchase a battery-powered radio reflects an expectation of frequent connectivity disruptions.

The Solutionism Gap

The innovative spirit of Silicon Valley, so effective in entrepreneurial ventures, rarely extends to addressing these solvable, daily existential threats. Power grid failures are preventable. The internet should be designed for resilience, not reliant on vulnerable central hubs. Healthcare systems possess the knowledge to manage outbreaks, provided they are adequately prepared and resourced.

Perhaps most concerning is the lack of proactive action during these crises. The past year has revealed a widespread lack of preparedness and response capability across governments, organizations, and individuals.

The Power of Civil Society and Beyond Coding

Crowdsourced initiatives that emerged during COVID-19 to connect people with hospitals, track data, and facilitate vaccine access are commendable, despite their imperfections. They demonstrate a flourishing civil society.

However, it’s crucial to recognize that online efforts cannot fully compensate for real-world action. The tech industry’s inclination to “code up a web app” to solve all problems overlooks the fact that many disasters require on-the-ground responses that cannot be addressed with Python code.

A Notable Exception: Sergey Brin

Google co-founder Sergey Brin stands out as an exception, dedicating his resources to building global disaster response capacity through an organization called Global Support and Development, as detailed by Mark Harris.

We need to see more initiatives like this, and quickly.

Refocusing on Present Challenges

The tech industry has long been fascinated by existential risk, from early science fiction to the Manhattan Project, and from AI to cyberpunk. We have consistently acknowledged the potential for technological progress to have profound consequences.

However, it’s time to shift our focus from the distant and speculative to the immediate and tangible challenges facing the world today. Many of these challenges are not only solvable but eminently so, if we dedicate the necessary time and effort. This requires overcoming our cognitive biases and prioritizing the mundane, yet highly probable, events that pose the greatest threat to our survival.