Though I am disappointed by the thrust of the author. Nanotech may be important, therefore longtermist EAs should not work on it, should not talk about it and should only study it in secret, getting paid through some EA foundation to just sit and "strategize" about its risks. Improving lives of billions of people with APM/nanotech is not valuable, saving billions of lives is not valuable, increasing man's power over matter is not valuable, preventing civilizational collapse due to resource depletion/climate change is not valuable.

I am starting to think that longtermism may indeed be a cognitive cancer that is consuming parts of EA and transhumanism. Let's hope I am not put on some kill list by well-meaning longtermists for this comment...

Adam Marblestone

Good to see nanotech and APM finally get some attention from the EA experts after 10 (15?) years of neglect!

We at NanoLab ( http://nanolabvr.com/ ) stand firmly behind an aggressive (but of course risk-aware) strategy of implementing APM for the benefit of humanity quickly and safely.

I want also to emphasize that the Bottleneck analysis report is top-notch and is probably a required reading for anyone interested in the topic (unless you already know all the background and who did what when), since it's up to date and very thorough.