| ▲ | wewewedxfgdf 3 hours ago | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Please explain exactly how all humanity could be wiped out. It's ridiculous - anyone who thinks about it for a minute or two will realize that its utterly impossible. Ordinary people/politicians don't understand AI so they turn off their rational mind and assume there is something super incredible some magical powers that they cannot understand that can destroy all humans. Even humans - the real risk to humanity - could not destroy all humans even if they tried. There is no plausible scenario. Even climate change and nuclear war and bio weapons - the most damaging mechanisms - would still only get some percentage of the people on earth. And if we are talking about Skynet and self replicating robots and Terminators - please, grow up. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | zug_zug 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Here's a wikipedia page on the topic, since it's much too deep a topic to really understand here. The ad-hominem stuff seems inappropriate here, Gates, Hawking, Musk have identified this as a credible threat, so saying "grow up" isn't really a sufficient argument. Also arguing only 90% of humanity would die isn't really much consolation. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Existential_risk_from_artifici... | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | ACCount39 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
"Please, grow up"? What, did I miss the moment when it was officially proven that, under the laws of physics as we know them, Skynet and self replicating robots and Terminators are impossible? What we are actually seeing now is that robotics is getting deeper and deeper into the military, AI-driven decision-making and target selection is increasingly a part of modern military operations, the line between military hardware and civilian hardware blurs, and, on the civilian side, there are at least five major companies and a dozen less prominent ones working on making universal worker robots a reality. We're closer to "Skynet and self replicating robots and Terminators" now than we ever were at any point in time. The issue of AI risk is that AI, unlike a virus or a climate event, is an intelligent adversary. Black Death could kill 50% of the population, but it didn't have a plan for finishing off the plague survivors. It was incapable of having a plan like that. An AI doesn't have this limitation. Black Death was, effectively, one bioweapon. An AI can have one bioweapon, and then a backup bioweapon, then a backup backup bioweapon, and then a dozen more bioweapons designed to collapse ecosystems and disrupt human ability to establish a reliable food supply rather than kill humans directly - all deployed at the same time. With a production run of 200 million killer robots that will be ready just in time to greet those who managed to survive all of that. A crippling strike against human civilization, followed up by cleanup. Humans are only this survivable because they can think their way out of issues and adapt to adversity. Most threats can't beat humans at that - humans adapt too quickly. AI could. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | jswelker 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
That's a weak consolation. "Don't worry, nukes can't literally end humanity, just kill billions and dramatically immiserate the remnant forever. No worries guys." AI doesn't have to turn us all into paper clips to make the world a really bad place. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | kzrdude 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
I like you, I think very similarly. Humans are "like rats": we can live almost anywhere, we'll find a way to survive. But that just means we won't all be wiped out. We need to understand when discussing global issues, such as this or like climate change that it's about prosperity and quality of life. We're trying to plan for a good life (for all people?). | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | Sharlin 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
We know pathogens that are extremely contagious, and we know pathogens that are extremely deadly. We also know toxins that are lethal at nanogram/kg doses. There's no reason to believe that a sufficiently advanced intelligence couldn't come up with a way to combine those traits. One plausible scenario is depicted in detail in "If Anyone Builds It, Everyone Dies" (Yudkowsky & Soares 2025), so I refer you to that. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | brokensegue 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
We could hit the entire planet with nukes. Yeah maybe <1% would survive immediately, but who knows about long term. I think that's close enough. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | 0xDEAFBEAD 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Here are some links to get you started: https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/LAPa2jxoq3n63GzTr/some-ways-... https://slatestarcodex.com/2015/04/07/no-physical-substrate-... As for self-replicating robots--it's no more bizarre than other technological developments which were successfully anticipated in advance, e.g. moon landings. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | ajross 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> It's ridiculous - anyone who thinks about it for a minute or two will realize that its utterly impossible. Well, in a narrow sense of "wiped out" (c.f. Terminator/SkyNet), sure. But the deeper worry is better expressed this way: AI is now starting to accomplish things that defy explanation, or prediction. We don't know if Alignment is even a solvable problem as we thought we understood it. So basically, yes: "humanity" is probably not at risk of extinction per se in a biological sense. Human culture, civilization? Who the fuck knows any more. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | bch 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> Please explain exactly how all humanity could be wiped out. Many, many people are slipping through social welfare cracks and suffering as we speak because the cost of fuel is rising[0] and we’re ostensibly helping one another and living-well. People are not durable, and not adaptive in the face of threats to “substrate” that we’ve mostly taken for granted. We are paying (in the small, in the scope of humanity) for tolls that we’ve rung up. Just less than 4000 people in Europe died[1] because the temperature ticked up a few degrees[2]. Does that make you think we’re actually robust? What happens if our at-risk electrical grid gets shut down deliberately? If communication infrastructure is adversely affected? > Even humans - the real risk to humanity Because, on the whole, we’re in a manageable world with reasonable people keeping the peace. > Even climate change and nuclear war and bio weapons - the most damaging mechanisms - would still only get some percentage of the people on earth. Is that victory? I don’t think it’s an asteroid-class event like you seem to be leaning on, but potential threats to energy, be it electrical grid, fuel production (moving goods around the world is critical - you’re not going get a plot of dirt and garden your way out of grocery stores being empty - which many got to get a taste of during the COVID pandemic) or communication. We actually fare poorly in the face of pressure there, and I’m not bullish on humanity “pulling together” like Independence Day[3] versus forming tribes and tearing each other down. All this is predicated on a malicious AI taking over (e.g.) the electrical grid or conms, and I understand the problems with (e.g.) OpenAI/Hugging Face incident, or the overblown Mythos claims[4] (and how under some scrutiny these events shine lights on incompetence or hyperbole), but is there a trajectory/future where these systems (electrical, comms) are genuinely under threat? Do you think we’ll respond better than I described when we’re less comfortable, less in control? We’re in a tizzy over social media and it’s detrimental effects on society and it’s essentially an opt-in entertainment platform… [0] https://www.pbs.org/newshour/economy/bessent-said-the-k-shap... [1] https://www.dw.com/en/heat-wave-european-countries-report-37... [2] I’m not trying to diminish this - and it took a lot of “work” (environmental abuse) to arrive here - but (say) 10 degree rise in temperature sounds a lot less dramatic than thermonuclear war… but here we are, with 3,700 deaths. [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independence_Day_(1996_film) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||