[iansimon]

> If there is a 1% chance the world will end unless we do x, we shouldn’t do a cost-benefit analysis. Instead, assuming x is feasible, we should simply do it.

What is the chance the world will end even if we do x? What does feasible mean? Is killing 10% of the population feasible? Is this potential end of the world happening in a year, or in a thousand years?

I'd go on, but this is starting to look a bit like a cost-benefit analysis.