Arturo Macias

Economist, Risk Manager @ Banco de España
-38 karmaJoined Aug 2022Working (6-15 years)


I am an Economist working at the Financial Risk Department of Banco de España (Spanish Central Bank). I was born in 1977 and I have recently finished my PhD Thesis (See ORCID webpage: ).

How I can help others

Risk Management, banking regulation, energy and commodities, mechanism design.


Fascinanting work, while I think that too much work is spent on nuclear winter, and not enough in the far more likely (and far more tractable) problem of the impact of Electromagnetic Pulses. Nuclear Winter scenarios probably would imply such breakdown of social order that not much can be done

On the other hand, if EMPs are devastating enough, even a small nuclear war can leave a good percentage of our infrastructure destroyed. EMP is a supercatastrophic (but non existential risk) that in my view has the best cost-benefit ratio in the entire spectrum of Global risks. It is also a risk specially suited for engineers, because you need a deep understanding of electromagnetism and electric technology.

Well, I hope philosophers are aware of how much ideas are super-structure of the productive forces and the social relations! I am far from being a Marxist, but I suppose this is  a commonplace on modern Western historiography...

There is a case against the notion of moral progress: while the moral circle as a general rule expands with the general empowerment of Mankind, we also become more efficient at oppression. The XVII century Europeans created the Reform and the Glorious Revolution, and the same time their expanded capacities allowed for the Transatlantic Slave Trade. 

In my view, the European expansion was net negative until around the end of the XIX century, and while currently human progress is undeniable, when you consider animals, probably we are worse than ever. I am not a radical animalist: I have doubts on the sentience of even birds, but the expansion of animal farming of large vertebrates perhaps has undo in “total” moral terms the undeniable (and massive) human progress.  

If you realistic about your plans, no matter how extreme are your ideas or preferences, your actions will be inevitably moderate. Reality impose so narrow limits to what can be attained that you always end up in moderate action of failure.

Dear Joe,

I am reading the series, and I want to point out that to some extent there was a polar opposite to Lewis that was Olaf Stapledon. Lewis admired him and his Christinity  was probably influenced by the perfect depiction of cosmic indifference that Stapledon gave us. For me "First and Last Men" is still an absolute masterpiece.

An additional comment is that I wrote a piece on freedom under naturalistic dualism that probably you could find interesting (still looking how to publish it in a more formal way).

Also posted in Progress Forum:

Still, I would say my two posts linked above are not so difficult to read.

Well, nuclear weapons already exist (not conditional) and you survive one, two, how many nuclear wars?

There is a nuclear weaponized “human alignment” problem. Without a clear road to Utopy, how can we avoid, I don’t know, a nuclear war every 200 years? A geological level catastrophe on historic time scale cycle…

Nuclear war is inevitable in the scale of decades to centuries (see this: one and two).

Load more