>So we have real, actual harm hand-waved away by reference to a hypothetical.

Yes, because that harm is not even close to the same order of magnitude as the harm that rationalists are focused on, even if you discount it by a moderate likelihood factor. It doesn't matter if the "real world" sees AI doom as a "quaint and somewhat interesting hypothetical about a far off future" - unless you're actually agreeing with me that this is primarily a PR issue.

When rationalist sexual harassment starts threatening the survival of the human race (in a way other than raising the probability of AI doom via bad PR for rationalists), the tunnel vision critique may become more than laughable.