We’ll manage to make our own survival on this planet less probable, even without the help of “AI”.

chrisco255 4 days ago | parent | next [-]

I don't know what reality you're living in, but there are more people on this planet than ever in history and most of them are quite well fed.

	▲	jebarker 4 days ago \| parent [-]
		And they have nuclear weapons and technology that may be destabilizing the ecosystem that supports their life. It’s wrong to commit to either end of this argument, we don’t know how it’ll play out, but the potential for humans drastically reducing our own numbers is very much still real.

▲

johnnienaked 4 days ago | parent | prev [-]

The cult of efficiency will end in the only perfectly efficient world--one without us.

▲

Bendy 4 days ago | parent [-]

I’m fed up of hearing that nonsense, no it won’t. Efficiency is a human-defined measure of observed outcomes versus desired outcomes. This is subject to change as much as we are. If we do optimize ourselves to death, it’ll be because it’s what we ultimately want to happen. That may be true for some people but certainly not everyone.

	▲	johnnienaked 4 days ago \| parent \| next [-]
		The equilibrium of ecology, without human interference, could be considered perfect efficiency. It's only when we get in there with our theories about mass production and consumption that we muss it up. We seem to forget that our well-being isn't self-determined, but dependent on the environment. But, like George Carlin said, "the Earth isn't going anywhere...WE ARE!" It's quite telling how much faith you put in humanity though, you sound fully bought in.
	▲	scotty79 4 days ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		I think the concern is that humans have very poor track record of defining efficiency let alone implementing solutions that serve it.