The last Open Thread was in October 2017, so I thought we were overdue for a new one.
Use this thread to post things that are awesome, but not awesome enough to be full posts. This is also a great place to post if you don't have enough karma to post on the main forum.
Consider giving your post a brief title to improve readability.
I think it's almost certainly true (confidence ~90%) that far future effects account for the bulk of impact for at least a substantial minority of interventions (like at least 20%? But very difficult to quantify believably).
Also seems almost certainly true that we don't know for which interventions far future effects account for the bulk of impact.
Separately, I'd wager that I feel pretty confident that taking into account all the possible long-term effects I can think of (population ethics, meat eating, economic development, differential technological development), that the effect of AMF is still net positive. I wonder if you really can model all these things? I previously wrote about five ways to handle flow-through effects in analysis and like this kind of weighted quantitative modeling.