What 2026 looks like

Daniel KokotajloLessWrong2021

Read on LessWrong

Abstract

This was written for the Vignettes Workshop.[1] The goal is to write out a detailed future history (“trajectory”) that is as realistic (to me) as I can currently manage, i.e. I’m not aware of any alternative trajectory that is similarly detailed and clearly more plausible to me. The methodology is roughly: Write a future history of 2022. Condition on it, and write a future history of 2023. Repeat for 2024, 2025, etc. (I'm posting 2022-2026 now so I can get feedback that will help me write 2027+. I intend to keep writing until the story reaches singularity/extinction/utopia/etc.) What’s the point of doing this? Well, there are a couple of reasons: * Sometimes attempting to write down a concrete example causes you to learn things, e.g. that a possibility is more or less plausible than you thought. * Most serious conversation about the future takes place at a high level of abstraction, talking about e.g. GDP acceleration, timelines until TAI is affordable, multipolar vs. unipolar takeoff… vignettes are a neglected complementary approach worth exploring. * Most stories are written backwards. The author begins with some idea of how it will end, and arranges the story to achieve that ending. Reality, by contrast, proceeds from past to future. It isn’t trying to entertain anyone or prove a point in an argument. * Anecdotally, various people seem to have found Paul Christiano’s “tales of doom” stories helpful, and relative to typical discussions those stories are quite close to what we want. (I still think a bit more detail would be good — e.g.

Cite this
@online{Kokotajlo2021,

title = {What 2026 looks like},

author = {Daniel Kokotajlo},

url = {https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/6Xgy6CAf2jqHhynHL/what-2026-looks-like},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-08-06},

journal = {LessWrong},

howpublished = {LessWrong},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {online}

}

← All research