Thanks for correcting me! I've reviewed my notes, and made some additional points to ensure I don't make the mistake again. 

Update: I just finished this book. It was as advertised: a concise, technical and sometimes challenging experience of moral philosophy, at the edge of my non-specialist understanding, but I really appreciated it. A couple of really important takeaways for me:

1. The robustness of minimalist axiologies to various instantiations of the Repugnant Conclusion, especially under (non-sharp) lexicality. 
2. A willingness to "bite the bullet" in certain cases, in particular the Archimedean minimalist 'Reverse Repugnant Conclusion' (i.e. it's better to add lots of bad lives, to slightly reduce the unbearable suffering of enough other bad lives) and the axiological 'perfection' of an empty world (matched only by one in which all lives are completely untroubled). 
3. Relatedly, a willingness to "spit the bullet back out" where negative utilitarianism/minimalist views have been maligned, misrepresented or generally underdone, including by high-profile folks within EA whom I don't think have publicly changed their positions. 

Thank you for writing this, Teo, and well done again! I hope to write a longer-form summary of the ideas, both for myself and others, as I think there's a great deal of value here. 

I'm really excited to read this, Teo, congratulations on publishing it. 

Have just signed up, and looking forward to it! Thanks for organising. I hadn't come across the Foresight Institute before, even though I'd heard of the concept of existential hope, so I'll take a look at some of those resources, too. 

You're welcome, thanks for taking the time to read it! 

Hi, MvK, good choice. I'm already preparing an application! Thanks.