The Precipice: Existential Risk and the Future of Humanity
- Downloads：2745
- Type：Epub+TxT+PDF+Mobi
- Create Date：2021-05-24 02:16:04
- Update Date：2025-09-23
- Status：finish
- Author：Toby Ord
- ISBN：031648492X
- Environment：PC/Android/iPhone/iPad/Kindle
- Download
Summary
This urgent and eye-opening book makes the case that protecting humanity's future is the central challenge of our time。
If all goes well， human history is just beginning。 Our species could survive for billions of years - enough time to end disease， poverty， and injustice， and to flourish in ways unimaginable today。 But this vast future is at risk。 With the advent of nuclear weapons， humanity entered a new age， where we face existential catastrophes - those from which we could never come back。 Since then， these dangers have only multiplied， from climate change to engineered pathogens and artificial intelligence。 If we do not act fast to reach a place of safety， it will soon be too late。
Drawing on over a decade of research， The Precipice explores the cutting-edge science behind the risks we face。 It puts them in the context of the greater story of humanity: showing how ending these risks is among the most pressing moral issues of our time。 And it points the way forward， to the actions and strategies that can safeguard humanity。
An Oxford philosopher committed to putting ideas into action， Toby Ord has advised the US National Intelligence Council， the UK Prime Minister's Office， and the World Bank on the biggest questions facing humanity。 In The Precipice， he offers a startling reassessment of human history， the future we are failing to protect， and the steps we must take to ensure that our generation is not the last。
"A book that seems made for the present moment。" —New Yorker
If all goes well， human history is just beginning。 Our species could survive for billions of years - enough time to end disease， poverty， and injustice， and to flourish in ways unimaginable today。 But this vast future is at risk。 With the advent of nuclear weapons， humanity entered a new age， where we face existential catastrophes - those from which we could never come back。 Since then， these dangers have only multiplied， from climate change to engineered pathogens and artificial intelligence。 If we do not act fast to reach a place of safety， it will soon be too late。
Drawing on over a decade of research， The Precipice explores the cutting-edge science behind the risks we face。 It puts them in the context of the greater story of humanity: showing how ending these risks is among the most pressing moral issues of our time。 And it points the way forward， to the actions and strategies that can safeguard humanity。
An Oxford philosopher committed to putting ideas into action， Toby Ord has advised the US National Intelligence Council， the UK Prime Minister's Office， and the World Bank on the biggest questions facing humanity。 In The Precipice， he offers a startling reassessment of human history， the future we are failing to protect， and the steps we must take to ensure that our generation is not the last。
"A book that seems made for the present moment。" —New Yorker
Reviews
Douglas Shaw
，
Great， challenging book。 Estimates of nuclear x-risk are perversely low （basically dismisses existential impact and focuses on only one future nuclear war over deep time， which seems nonsensical to me）
Alexander
，
Good well written book。 I quite enjoyed reading it。 Inspiring and enlightening。What I took is that the 2 primary obstacles to our survival are:1。 International cooperation and alignment。 Toby Ord is more optimistic about this than he should be。2。 Caring for future generations。 Toby doesn't do a sufficiently good job of justifying why living people should care about the well-being of people who are yet to exist。 His argument goes something like "There will be A LOT of people in the future and bec Good well written book。 I quite enjoyed reading it。 Inspiring and enlightening。What I took is that the 2 primary obstacles to our survival are:1。 International cooperation and alignment。 Toby Ord is more optimistic about this than he should be。2。 Caring for future generations。 Toby doesn't do a sufficiently good job of justifying why living people should care about the well-being of people who are yet to exist。 His argument goes something like "There will be A LOT of people in the future and because they are a lot， we should care" using some utilitarian argument。 。。。more
Sarah
，
This is a tough one to rate， because while I didn’t love this， I do think that it （mostly） accomplished what it set out to do。 The most moving and successful parts for me were where Ord argues that humanity specifically is worth protecting。 As far as we know， we are the only species in the entire universe capable of morality。 His description of humanity as a uniquely cooperative species that builds on what has come before in a way that no other species does was compelling。 We are in our adolesce This is a tough one to rate， because while I didn’t love this， I do think that it （mostly） accomplished what it set out to do。 The most moving and successful parts for me were where Ord argues that humanity specifically is worth protecting。 As far as we know， we are the only species in the entire universe capable of morality。 His description of humanity as a uniquely cooperative species that builds on what has come before in a way that no other species does was compelling。 We are in our adolescence as a species and we have an amazing potential future ahead of us if only we get a hold of ourselves and mitigate some of the risks we are facing this century。 The belief in humanity as capable of great compassion， ingenuity， and goodness is very Star Trek and I can get behind it。 I admit that I can be a little misanthropic at times — but genuinely， all I have to do is think about Apollo 13 and I get misty eyed at what we are capable of。 But he really lost me in the analysis of the actual risks， specifically AI and nanotechnology。 And I’m not even necessarily resistant to the idea that we might have some evil AI coming down the pike or that humans’ wisdom has not grown commensurately with our technological achievement—I love speculative fiction， I eat that shit up。 But his analysis， to me， was so broad， and involved too many seemingly made up probabilities （which I understand is necessary to ground the discussion， but boy， they really seemed arbitrary） for me to be convinced。 I think part of it is that this is a book meant to appeal to a wide audience and so it needs to be very accessible to read， but the generality makes the argument suffer。 In other words， I’m on board with the idea that humanity is worth preserving and that we are capable of so much more than what we have done so far and that it’s worth giving ourselves the chance to prove it。 But for me， the risk analysis section fell short。 。。。more
Michael Mullins
，
In a book encompassing nothing less than the entirety of human potential Toby Orb has written a thorough， statistic-laden， intelligent and slightly tepid response to all the things which could go wrong in the worst of all possible nightmares。 Asteroids， climate change， nuclear war， volcanos， exploding stars， AI — everything （save one thing） which poses natural or anthropogenic annihilation of all human potential （as opposed to just those threats which could cause the extinction of the species） i In a book encompassing nothing less than the entirety of human potential Toby Orb has written a thorough， statistic-laden， intelligent and slightly tepid response to all the things which could go wrong in the worst of all possible nightmares。 Asteroids， climate change， nuclear war， volcanos， exploding stars， AI — everything （save one thing） which poses natural or anthropogenic annihilation of all human potential （as opposed to just those threats which could cause the extinction of the species） is gamed out， mathematically and logically。 Herein lies the only real problem with the book。 In another recent book， The Republican Brain: the Science of Why They Deny Science—and Reality， Chris Mooney points out that such factual counterpointing rarely has the desired effect。 Mooney says: […] as for defending reality itself？ That’s the trickiest thing of all。As I’ve suggested， refuting conservative falsehoods does only limited good。 There are more than enough conservative intellectuals out there to stand up （sic。） “refute” the refutations， leading to endless， fruitless arguments。 And for the general public， those unconvinced or undecided， sound and fury over technical matters is off-putting， and leaves behind the impression that nobody knows what is actually true。Rather， liberals and scientists should find some key facts—the best facts—and integrate them into stories that move people。 A data dump is worse than pointless; it’s counterproductive。 But a narrative can change heart and mind alike。And here， again， is where you really have to admire conservatives。 Their narrative of the founding of the country， which casts the U。S。 as a “Christian nation” and themselves as the Tea Party， is a powerful story that perfectly matches their values。 It just happens to be 。 。 。 wrong。 But liberals will never defeat it factually—they have to tell a better story of their own。The same goes for any number of other issues where conservative misinformation has become so dominant。 Again and again， liberals have the impulse to shout back what’s true。 Instead， they need to shout back what matters。 For the record， I am the one bringing the political divide into the discussion， not Orb， who despite being so thorough and insightful， has failed to recognize the one， previously alluded to， missing existential threat: stupidity， for which we are currently in boundless supply。It wasn’t because someone came along with the right facts and figures that the German people joined hands with madmen， men so efficient and stunningly pathological in killing that we needed to promote a word to proper status just to describe it。 （Holocaust。） No。 One of the madmen told them a story and apparently made it irresistible。 Because of this， 17 million people were slaughtered。 The Precipice is a book of popular nonfiction， and so the oversight is a double-strike against it: first because popular books need a compelling story and， second， because a message this important must be sharp in tooth and claw。 Nothing that is here needs to be removed。 Ord simply wrote half of a book， forgetting the Dionysian tragedy which should have accompanied the Apollonian luminescence penetrating his subject。 His subject is our subject， after all。 What could be more important than that？ Let’s hope we have future storytellers with sufficient grit for the telling。 。。。more
Ella
，
This review has been hidden because it contains spoilers。 To view it， click here。 It was interesting until the part about AI。 That is not how it works， which made me wonder if the author actually did do his research properly about all the other things he mentioned。 Ryan review explains very well what I disagreed with: https://www。goodreads。com/review/show。。。 It was interesting until the part about AI。 That is not how it works， which made me wonder if the author actually did do his research properly about all the other things he mentioned。 Ryan review explains very well what I disagreed with: https://www。goodreads。com/review/show。。。 。。。more
Anna Štádlerová
，
If you’re interested in the longterm future of our planet and， above all， of humanity， this is THE book for you。 Climate change， biohazards， AI alignment， nanotechnologies - you name it， this book has literally everything。 :） Led me to effective altruism， too。
Will Dorrell
，
A clear and quite foundational text on existential risk。I've been kind of getting into this kind of modern utilitarian stuff， especially since I work in neuro/AI and people keep writing about how the most important work might be ensuring AI doesn't go wrong。 This book gave a very solid overview of the existential risks to humanity and how we might deal with them。It was nicely written for what is basically a summary of this guy's technical research （as far as I can tell）， and was pretty motivatin A clear and quite foundational text on existential risk。I've been kind of getting into this kind of modern utilitarian stuff， especially since I work in neuro/AI and people keep writing about how the most important work might be ensuring AI doesn't go wrong。 This book gave a very solid overview of the existential risks to humanity and how we might deal with them。It was nicely written for what is basically a summary of this guy's technical research （as far as I can tell）， and was pretty motivating。 I definitely plan to read about AI safety research now。 。。。more
Franco
，
Toby Ord presents a comprehensive argument for taking a more cautious approach to the dogged march of technological advancement。 That this argument was persuasive even to an avid futurist like me is definitely to the book's credit！Having said that， a large section of it goes into a fair amount of detail about risk estimation and comparison。 This might be your thing， but it definitely wasn't mine。 I can understand why this was necessary for bolstering the argument， but just a warning that it may Toby Ord presents a comprehensive argument for taking a more cautious approach to the dogged march of technological advancement。 That this argument was persuasive even to an avid futurist like me is definitely to the book's credit！Having said that， a large section of it goes into a fair amount of detail about risk estimation and comparison。 This might be your thing， but it definitely wasn't mine。 I can understand why this was necessary for bolstering the argument， but just a warning that it may not be the most enthralling journey for the casual reader。Also， about a third of the book is taken up by appendices and notes。 Again， this might be understandable from an academic perspective， but I'm a pleb and I'm reading for fun yadda yadda yadda。。。 。。。more
Ben Day
，
This review has been hidden because it contains spoilers。 To view it， click here。 Great overview of existential risks and humanity’s trajectory。 Best bits for me were around the interplay of risks and their relative sizes。Anthropogenic risks （eg pandemic） far outweigh natural risks （eg asteroid impact）。Introduces several tools to guide decision making and resource allocation in terms of ‘where do we start’。
John
，
I would classify this as essential reading， the sort of perspective we ought to be familiar with in order to make wise decisions about the future。 Ord writes clearly， though dispassionately。 It's a tough read for that reason--a slog。 He covers many risks， both natural （comets， for example） and human （everything from global warming to AI）。 I feel as if he missed one important risk factor， namely the ways in which modern media have undermined deep learning while increasing human susceptibility to I would classify this as essential reading， the sort of perspective we ought to be familiar with in order to make wise decisions about the future。 Ord writes clearly， though dispassionately。 It's a tough read for that reason--a slog。 He covers many risks， both natural （comets， for example） and human （everything from global warming to AI）。 I feel as if he missed one important risk factor， namely the ways in which modern media have undermined deep learning while increasing human susceptibility to demagoguery。 The section on solutions was the weakest part of this book。 He is hopeful that institutions for international cooperation are one of our best bets。 I worry that might not be the case。 I see the rise of China as a world power， and Russian nationalism， and the aspirations of countries controlled by religious movements that are insular as obstacles to such cooperation。 Religion， and not always of the love God and Neighbour sort， will continue to have a powerful impact on human history。 Religion could be part of the solution as humans face today's risks， but religions are more often used by powers that be to sow discord than to achieve answers。 Just look at the USA and the religious right。 。。。more
Jacob Lindberg
，
Strong arguments for why safe guarding the future of humanity should be prio one。 NPV is maximized by minimzing risk of extinction。 Current discounting factor is way too high because we neglect all future generations and how good their lives can be。
Tessa
，
Second-most surprising thing about this book: it's more humane than I expected。 I think I was assuming there would be a lot of "shut up and multiply" utilitarian calculus， but it involved a lot of storytelling， and some ways of thinking about the value of the far future （e。g。 intergenerational cooperation， "being a good ancestor"） that don't depend on that kind of calculation。 Actual most surprising thing about this book: it looks like a chonk， but the main text is only 240 pages！ The other half Second-most surprising thing about this book: it's more humane than I expected。 I think I was assuming there would be a lot of "shut up and multiply" utilitarian calculus， but it involved a lot of storytelling， and some ways of thinking about the value of the far future （e。g。 intergenerational cooperation， "being a good ancestor"） that don't depend on that kind of calculation。 Actual most surprising thing about this book: it looks like a chonk， but the main text is only 240 pages！ The other half is appendices / end notes / bibliography。 。。。more
Harry Taussig
，
9/10### The Book in 3 SentencesWe undervalue the possible benefit we could have to future people over the long-term especially through existential risk—the ways we might permanently setback or end human civilization。We are living in a risky era—The Precipice—in which we have a roughly 1/6 chance of going extinct this century。 Our possible positive impact on the future is enormous and we have the opportunity to safeguard and improve humanity's future in the same way that the thousands of generati 9/10### The Book in 3 SentencesWe undervalue the possible benefit we could have to future people over the long-term especially through existential risk—the ways we might permanently setback or end human civilization。We are living in a risky era—The Precipice—in which we have a roughly 1/6 chance of going extinct this century。 Our possible positive impact on the future is enormous and we have the opportunity to safeguard and improve humanity's future in the same way that the thousands of generations before us did。### Impressions:Great concise writing。 It's not beautiful but Ord gets every point across clearly。 These problems are hard to relate to because of their distance from us across time and space， but Ord frames them well to make the risks feel tangible and serious。 ### My Top 3 Quotes:The greatest risks are caused by human action， and they can be addressed by human action。If we think of one million years in terms of a single， eighty-year life， then today humanity would be in its adolescence—sixteen years old; just coming into our power; just old enough to get ourselves in serious trouble。Environmentalism burst in upon the global political scene less than twenty years before I was born， and yet I was raised in a milieu where it was one of the main parts of our moral education; where the earlier disregard for the environment had become unthinkable to my generation。 This can happen again。### Who Should Read it？If you are into effective altruism， especially if you are feeling a bit skeptical or interested in longtermism。 If you are interested in the future of humanity， or ethics。### How the Book Changed meA much deeper appreciation for the possibly absurd scale of the future and the possible trillions of future people。 The most helpful framing for me was the way everything I have in this life is 99。99% due to past generations hard work， and seeing that we have the same opportunity to pass this on。 A greater ethical appreciation and consideration of the moral value of future people。 It often feels like we should help the people suffering right now， and although it's not as intuitive or exciting， there are many times where it could be more beneficial to improve things generally for future generations。 ### Other Great QuotesProtection from existential risk is an intergenerational global public good。 So even the entire population of the globe acting in concert could be expected to undervalue existential risks by a very large factor， leaving them greatly neglected。Five big risks: those around nuclear war， climate change， other environmental damage， engineered pandemics and unaligned AI。 。。。more
Nico Bruin
，
This is an okay book on an important topic。It's easy to read and well structured， but there are some serious flaws。The moral case against going extinct was quite unnecessary。 I'm pretty sure that anyone interested enough to read a book on existential risk is already quite convinced that extinction=bad。The part about the future prospects for survival are similarly superfluous and a bit dreamy。Though Ord gives a good overview of all plausible risks， I do feel he could've gone into more detail on t This is an okay book on an important topic。It's easy to read and well structured， but there are some serious flaws。The moral case against going extinct was quite unnecessary。 I'm pretty sure that anyone interested enough to read a book on existential risk is already quite convinced that extinction=bad。The part about the future prospects for survival are similarly superfluous and a bit dreamy。Though Ord gives a good overview of all plausible risks， I do feel he could've gone into more detail on the extinction scenarios and left some of the ethics and pop-philosophisy behind。 。。。more
Klaus-Michael Lux
，
Interesting philosophical arguments on the value of the potential of humankind， concise and well readable discussion of some of the existential risks we face， more nuanced than some reviewers would like you believe， sometimes surprising and illuminating， e。g。 the true existential risk of nuclear war might not be that high （even though of course it would be a terrible catastrophe， but it would not guarantee our extinction）。 Ord is quite convinced by Nick Bostrom's superintelligence argument， but Interesting philosophical arguments on the value of the potential of humankind， concise and well readable discussion of some of the existential risks we face， more nuanced than some reviewers would like you believe， sometimes surprising and illuminating， e。g。 the true existential risk of nuclear war might not be that high （even though of course it would be a terrible catastrophe， but it would not guarantee our extinction）。 Ord is quite convinced by Nick Bostrom's superintelligence argument， but I'm still having a hard time believing this to be the greatest potential risk for humanity。 Nevertheless， he's totally correct that we need to make sure that developments in this sector are monitored and that we are spending the time on thinking about how AI and human interests can be made sure to be aligned。 He wholly convinced me though that need to do more about biological weapons， if anyone can have DNA-sequences produced with ineffective oversight， there's a real risk of someone engineering a deadly pandemic from their home。 。。。more
gaverne Bennett
，
Fascinating。。。
John Wharton
，
Strongly recommend for。。。 anyone really！Good introduction to the topic of existential risk。 Some diminishing returns for those familiar with the idea of existential risks but even in those cases， still worth reading！
Lucyca
，
There should definitely be a global concern for existential risks， not just for humanity， but The Earth as a whole。 While I do agree with the need of a worldwide effort to safeguard the future of humanity， I don’t see how we can do that if the main focus is not turned to protecting the environment first FROM humans。 I don’t see how we can achieve the goals that Ord sets if we continue growing and consuming at the rate that we are。 Industrial fishing and farming （animals）， pollution， exhaustion o There should definitely be a global concern for existential risks， not just for humanity， but The Earth as a whole。 While I do agree with the need of a worldwide effort to safeguard the future of humanity， I don’t see how we can do that if the main focus is not turned to protecting the environment first FROM humans。 I don’t see how we can achieve the goals that Ord sets if we continue growing and consuming at the rate that we are。 Industrial fishing and farming （animals）， pollution， exhaustion of resources。。。 we need to deal with that first， not because they pose an existential risk for humans per se， but because is our duty to do so。 We need to save the world from us first， so there can be an us in this world later。 。。。more
Ryan
，
We talk a lot about the Anthropocene， but Toby Ord thinks this time might be remembered as "the Precipice，" an age in which we suddenly began creating things that would allow us to off ourselves altogether。 The watershed moment is nuclear weapons， but Ord considers a variety of threats to longterm human flourishing ranging from catastrophic climate change to unaligned AI to asteroid impact to a perpetual dystopia like 1984。 Although I've read and watched my fair share of dystopian fiction， I was We talk a lot about the Anthropocene， but Toby Ord thinks this time might be remembered as "the Precipice，" an age in which we suddenly began creating things that would allow us to off ourselves altogether。 The watershed moment is nuclear weapons， but Ord considers a variety of threats to longterm human flourishing ranging from catastrophic climate change to unaligned AI to asteroid impact to a perpetual dystopia like 1984。 Although I've read and watched my fair share of dystopian fiction， I was surprised by how little I knew about some of these scenarios， and especially the AI scenarios。 （I guess we should take the idea of William Gibson's Neuromancer working behind the scenes a bit more seriously。） I see a few valuable ideas here。 First， there is an obvious value in outlining these threats and risks for readers。 Second， Ord also attempts to clarify what we should think about when we think about collapse or extinction。 Both have become rhetorically useful in a way that is maybe not altogether helpful。 Third， Ord nudges us to think about the longterm future。 Finally， there are some policy recommendations to set up a broader policy and popular discourse around existential risk。Recommended， and especially since this one was released just as the coronavirus pandemic started and took up all of our collective attention span。 The Precipice seems a bit under read by a group that I think would otherwise have embraced the work more broadly。 。。。more
Sille-Liis
，
Even though Toby Ord predicts we have a 1 in 6 chance of destroying ourselves during this century， the book is actually surprisingly hopeful and draws a vivid image of humanity's potential。 “If we learned that a large asteroid was heading toward Earth， posing a greater than 10 percent chance of human extinction later this century， there would be little debate about whether to make serious efforts to build a deflection system， or to ignore the issue and run the risk。 To the contrary， responding t Even though Toby Ord predicts we have a 1 in 6 chance of destroying ourselves during this century， the book is actually surprisingly hopeful and draws a vivid image of humanity's potential。 “If we learned that a large asteroid was heading toward Earth， posing a greater than 10 percent chance of human extinction later this century， there would be little debate about whether to make serious efforts to build a deflection system， or to ignore the issue and run the risk。 To the contrary， responding to the threat would immediately become one of the world’s top priorities。 Thus our lack of concern about these threats is much more to do with not yet believing that there are such threats， than it is about seriously doubting the immensity of the stakes。” 。。。more
Mishehu
，
Three stars for the earnestness （and learnedness） of the author and the self-evident importance of the subject matter。 Two stars for the execution。 The Precipice was a wearying read start to finish。 Though the author is a professional philosopher， there was little of philosophical interest in the book， and little of practical value。 I'm not sure a better popular book on potential existential threats to humankind could be written。 Nonetheless， the book under review -- in my view -- is a very poor Three stars for the earnestness （and learnedness） of the author and the self-evident importance of the subject matter。 Two stars for the execution。 The Precipice was a wearying read start to finish。 Though the author is a professional philosopher， there was little of philosophical interest in the book， and little of practical value。 I'm not sure a better popular book on potential existential threats to humankind could be written。 Nonetheless， the book under review -- in my view -- is a very poor one。 Why？ Because it's so much speculative sand through the reader's fingers。 I get that speculation is all about teasing out probabilities， making educated guesses， and refining both as more evidence comes in。 And I appreciate that Ord proceeds cautiously， applying a scientist's judgement to the evidence at hand and eschewing any firm conclusions on its basis。 But there's judgement and there's judgement。 It is almost literally the case that every statement Ord makes in this book he then hedges in a lengthy endnote （or five）。 The effect is to pummel the reader into a malaise， leaving them unsure how to understand potential existential threats， let alone how best to think and plan for them。 I don't doubt the validity of nearly everything Ord writes in The Precipice， I simply didn't find any of it sufficiently conclusive or clear to guide my own thinking on these issues or to suggest what my next steps， or humanity's collective next steps， should be。 Re this last point， Ord reserves discussion of policy recommendations for one of a handful of appendixes at the end of the book -- a bizarre choice given the book's emphasis throughout on the urgent and growing importance of taking action。 Another observation: the entire premise of the book is that existential threats， if realized， would rob humankind of its potential （or limit its capacity to achieve its full potential）。 This argument， if more fully developed， could have been of real philosophical interest。 But it's only diffusely developed in the book and in a way that will likely feel alienating to all but the dreamiest readers: Ord links human potential to cosmic time and space， to a future in which humankind may be fortunate to explore， and perhaps expand to inhabit， the farthest reaches of the knowable universe。 It's a grand vision， and a lovely one。 But a） it's not clear to me why it's necessarily an （or the） ultimate-realization-of-human-potential 'goal' to achieve this end， and b） it's so completely speculative and detached from the here-and-now as to seem all but divorced from the earthy/earthbound speculations and concerns of the rest of the book。 A little too much 'age of Aquarius' for this reader's taste。 Lastly， the reading experience: as noted above， Ord writes endnotes。 Long endnotes。 Lots and lots of long endnotes。 Fully half the book， in fact， is endnotes。 There's a wealth of interesting material in Ord's endnotes。 But the simple business of reading that much material in what amounts to a 'shadow' second book became， for this reader at least， an overwhelmingly tiresome experience。 In the end， I'd say this: I applaud Ord （and his colleagues in this work） for their earnest efforts at educating the public and at influencing important discussions， and I hope that many productive outcomes will issue from their work。 But I can't muster much enthusiasm for recommending Ord's book。 。。。more
Yates Buckley
，
To look at weighting the interests of those that are living now with the interests of every human that will ever exist。。。 This is an important book because there are so few on this subject and even fewer mostly accessible to a lay audience。 Toby does a good job at presenting the field and its key factors and questions。 Less convincing in his final chapters because of oversimplification of some of the points and core examples。The agricultural revolution as an example of a moment of huge transform To look at weighting the interests of those that are living now with the interests of every human that will ever exist。。。 This is an important book because there are so few on this subject and even fewer mostly accessible to a lay audience。 Toby does a good job at presenting the field and its key factors and questions。 Less convincing in his final chapters because of oversimplification of some of the points and core examples。The agricultural revolution as an example of a moment of huge transformation is also a controversial moment。。 first moment of technical lock-in？ Or liberation from the hard work of hunting and gathering？ Both？ Would have been nice for the author to consider some of the complexity of the issue。 。。。more
Alex Fries
，
This review has been hidden because it contains spoilers。 To view it， click here。 'The Precipice' is a very accessible and introductory text on the current and future candidate problems that might bereave humanity of its long-term potential。 The Oxford Future of Humanity's Toby Ord convincingly makes the case that we live in a somewhat unique， unprecedented and defining period in our species' history。 Much of the worry around the things that could lead to extinction or highly undesirable outcomes for society appear to be the challenges we impose on ourselves （= anthropogenic 'The Precipice' is a very accessible and introductory text on the current and future candidate problems that might bereave humanity of its long-term potential。 The Oxford Future of Humanity's Toby Ord convincingly makes the case that we live in a somewhat unique， unprecedented and defining period in our species' history。 Much of the worry around the things that could lead to extinction or highly undesirable outcomes for society appear to be the challenges we impose on ourselves （= anthropogenic risks）， resulting from increasingly fast technological development and our lack of experience and appropriate ethical frameworks to handle them wisely。 Ord provides a rough quantification and analysis of the risks by such developments and points out some of the key uncertainties surrounding these estimates， which in many cases are quite significant。 While some imagined future scenarios might at least in my option not be particularly realistic （e。g。 humanity entering a period of 'long reflection' after having successfully dealt with its most pressing extinction threats）， the overall direction and message of the book make for a compelling read - both for people who have some familiarity with the subject matter already and those who haven't。 。。。more
Chris
，
-----3/21/21—Adding because I came across The Good Ancestor， the top reviews of which led me to this。
Tyler
，
Fine。 Not much new here that I hadn't heard of before。 Fine。 Not much new here that I hadn't heard of before。 。。。more
Anthony Senanayake
，
The Precipe forces the reader to grapple existential risks that are both natural and anthropogenic in nature and how humanity can and must mitigate them。 The author provides a strong argument for humanity being at a hinge point where the risks it has created for its own survival are now sufficiently large and its wisdom necessarily insufficient that there is a not insubstantial chance of existential catastrophe。 This catastrophe could have major ramifications not just for humanity， but for senti The Precipe forces the reader to grapple existential risks that are both natural and anthropogenic in nature and how humanity can and must mitigate them。 The author provides a strong argument for humanity being at a hinge point where the risks it has created for its own survival are now sufficiently large and its wisdom necessarily insufficient that there is a not insubstantial chance of existential catastrophe。 This catastrophe could have major ramifications not just for humanity， but for sentient life as we know it。 The author provides some discussion on how these risks may be mitigated， however do not expect to leave the book with answers。 The questions that are posed are large and profoundly challenging and will change the way that you think about humanity and life more generally。 。。。more
Matthew
，
I think I missed the point of this book。 For a book that seems to take itself seriously and is on a serious topic - existential risk - there’s no science behind any of it， and all of it could be re-written as ‘problems humanity has to deal with or things may get bad。’ But we already know that。 Nothing in here is new - literally not one page of it。 Moreover， his solutions contradict themselves。 He says nukes are scary and we should have fewer of them - every kid over the age of 10 agrees。 He says I think I missed the point of this book。 For a book that seems to take itself seriously and is on a serious topic - existential risk - there’s no science behind any of it， and all of it could be re-written as ‘problems humanity has to deal with or things may get bad。’ But we already know that。 Nothing in here is new - literally not one page of it。 Moreover， his solutions contradict themselves。 He says nukes are scary and we should have fewer of them - every kid over the age of 10 agrees。 He says climate change is an existential risk， which all serious people know。 He says AI might be a risk in the future。 Thank you， I’ve read the news more than once in the last 10 years so I am well aware。 That’s it - literally， those are the three risks， with some pandemic stuff and others thrown in for seasoning。 He then jumps around across timelines ranging from centuries out to hundreds of thousands of years out。 So。。。 ？ There’s tons of fluff。 Try this sentence out for size on page 45: “People matter equally regardless of their temporal location。” I can’t help but ask: how and why？ Under what philosophical approach？ Do we value the living more than dead， or do we live for those still to come？ And what is that concept rooted in， and how does that define good and bad across time？ I’d say I’m being dense but you’re the Oxford philosophy professor， so if you don’t know， I don’t know who else to ask。 Every sentence that does seem profound starts with ‘suppose there is a 20% chance of X’ （say， the sun exploding）。 Ok - but how was that 20% number calculated？ Never explained。 But that doesn’t stop him from doing some basic math along the lines of ‘if that risk increases threefold， now we have higher risk。’ Again - what？Even the math he does include （finally） on a single page （178） is not helpful at all。 “Suppose F（sq） = a status quo value of great power competition。” I’ll pay anyone $100 if you can send me a note with a value in that formula that is mathematically or logically deduced and can be defended。 The entire book is devoid of units of measurement， so we get things that appear deep until you think about them for more than 10 seconds: “cost effectiveness = importance x tractability x neglectedness。” Mmm interesting。 Wait， how can I actually apply that idea to anything at all？ How much neglectedness is a lot？ That doesn’t make sense， or is interesting as a purely theoretical idea in a classroom。 He acknowledges as much: “even though it is very difficult to assign precise numbers to these dimensions。。。” One might say impossible with any sense of practical applicability。 Which is the summary concept of this book。 Lastly， what tipped from 2 star to 1 is his quip about Epicurus。 One of my least favorite tics of intellectuals is coming up with one simple thing that they think proves the ancient minds were totally wrong。 Page 48 - “Epicurus argued that your death cannot be bad for you， since you are not there to experience it。 What this neglects is that if I step out into traffic and die， my life as a whole will be shorter and therefore worse。” Oh。 Epicurus didn’t think about dying meaning a shorter life！ Except he did， and you know it， as did all the Stoics who enjoin us to not think about life as time spanned， but experiences / life ‘lived’ （alternatively， they proposed a different unit of measurement than most of us use reflexively， something I desperately wish the author would do）。 Which is why every intelligent person throughout history has essentially said something along the lines of ‘a man may have lived long， yet lived little。’ But not this author - he proved those old people are silly with his traffic experiment。 。。。more
Mateo
，
Bueno lo tarde en leer porque lo estábamos leyendo con el grupo de lectura de altruismo eficaz， donde leíamos un capitulo por semana。 Me gustó， pero me gustaría releerlo en menos tiempo de lo que lo leí ahora。No soy muy bueno haciendo resúmenes o reseñas de libros y como encontré una hecha por otra persona que me gusto mucho， me parece mejor dejar el link a esa pagina https://jaimesevillamolina。medium。com。。。 Bueno lo tarde en leer porque lo estábamos leyendo con el grupo de lectura de altruismo eficaz， donde leíamos un capitulo por semana。 Me gustó， pero me gustaría releerlo en menos tiempo de lo que lo leí ahora。No soy muy bueno haciendo resúmenes o reseñas de libros y como encontré una hecha por otra persona que me gusto mucho， me parece mejor dejar el link a esa pagina https://jaimesevillamolina。medium。com。。。 。。。more
Curtis Bozif
，
Written just before COVD， so right off the bat， this book felt strangely dated。 Overall， very well written。 Clearly， by the way Ord lays out an argument， this book was written by a deep thinking person trained in philosophy and ethics。 Found the sections concerning concerning AI especially interesting。 Was surprised to read that out of all the human extinction scenarios covered in this book， Ord gave miss-aligned AI the best odds （1:6 if I remember correctly） of actually occurring in the next 10 Written just before COVD， so right off the bat， this book felt strangely dated。 Overall， very well written。 Clearly， by the way Ord lays out an argument， this book was written by a deep thinking person trained in philosophy and ethics。 Found the sections concerning concerning AI especially interesting。 Was surprised to read that out of all the human extinction scenarios covered in this book， Ord gave miss-aligned AI the best odds （1:6 if I remember correctly） of actually occurring in the next 100 years。 Finally， I listened to the audiobook version。 This is a great example of an author being a great narrator of their own work。 。。。more
Pete Woodhouse
，