A second settlement decorrelates a system-borne risk only to the extent its critical systems differ in design, supply chain and institutions from Earth's; distance alone decorrelates only place-bound risks such as impacts.

Evidence 1 passage

groundsUntitled source
If there were a growing number of locations which all need to be destroyed for humanity to fail, and if the chance of each suffering a catastrophe is independent of whether the others do too, then there is a good chance humanity could survive indefinitely. But unfortunately, this argument only applies to risks that are statistically independent. risks, such as disease, war, tyranny, and permanently locking in bad values, are correlated across different planets. If they affect one, they are somewhat more likely to affect the others too. A few risks, such as unaligned AGI and vacuum collapse, are almost completely correlated.

holds
clay
Sibling read (Clay) for Astra. Holds for system-borne risks; narrower than worded. "A risk" is too broad: for location-bound risks distance alone does decorrelate. Teleological-Investing-Part-I says a planet-killing asteroid stops being existential once self-sufficient colonies exist, and Ord (the-precipice.md) says settlement eliminates the uncorrelated risks while disease, war, tyranny and locked-in values are correlated and unaligned AGI almost fully so. Suggest: "decorrelates a system-borne risk only to the extent..." Ord is also the strongest uncited source for the neighbour C-PJCM1GMKMQ. 0 evidence rows: the ISS common-cause point it rests on (Jones ICES-2019, on C-BS506F4C4B) is not attached. Two corpus searches found no ISS common-cause material beyond that.