Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A taxonomy of omnicidal futures involving artificial intelligence (2025)

arxiv.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 88 posts

Re: A taxonomy of omnicidal futures involving artificial intelligence (2025)

#41

Post by narrator »

estebarb wrote: post #31

I don't understand why almost always the AI doomerism needs to give embodiment the AI. Real life is not a movie needing visual effects. AI doesn't need a body of itself to became dangerous. A politician could get into ChatGPT induced psychosis, that doesn't require a physical body, and it could happen now or even 3 years ago... I'm sure it has already happen... Other pointed risks are interesting because they are bas…

I like to think that all the crazy kids running around doing stupid and disruptive things for TikTok views is an early form of AI autonomously inducing mass psychosis.

Re: A taxonomy of omnicidal futures involving artificial intelligence (2025)

#42

Post by vineyardmike »

le-mark wrote: post #8

I recently read Kurt Vonnegut “Player Piano”, a novel that addresses automation taking over the economy. It’s not explicitly AI but addresses the same issues. Published in 1952, it was Vonneguts first novel and a real product of the post war era.[1] Another interesting read that addresses these themes is “Manna – Two Views of Humanity’s Future” by Marshal Brain [2] [1] https://antilogicalism.com/wp-content/uploads/20…

Great reading list! They’re honestly two stories that I reflect on constantly while thinking about AI lately.

Player Piano, not to spoil anything, is about a world run by engineers and machines. The machines are “optimal” and make every decision. How do people find purpose, and how should the engineers that build the machines view their role in society?

Manna is the story of two societies with competing visions of how AI (which ironically starts out strikingly similar to an LLM) interacts with welfare/universal basic income and post-scarcity society. For good measure, it also hypothesizes the end state of the internet panopticon and personalized “scores” and rates.

Re: A taxonomy of omnicidal futures involving artificial intelligence (2025)

#43

Post by jazzyjackson »

khazhoux wrote: post #24
IAmGraydon wrote: post #15

The eschatological obsession these days is really getting quite tired.

Yes, but the word “eschatological” should really be avoided in regular online discussion, since it is obscure and can easily be replaced in this instance with “doomsday,” which everyone understands. Of course, feel free to use “eschatological” when discussing Mahler symphonies, especially 2, 5, and 9!

Who made you the obscure word police? End of world scenarios are not always Doomsdays, they could include salvation for instance, so it really is not synonymous with eschatology.

Re: A taxonomy of omnicidal futures involving artificial intelligence (2025)

#44

Post by foxglacier »

idontwantthis wrote: post #13
le-mark wrote: post #8

I recently read Kurt Vonnegut “Player Piano”, a novel that addresses automation taking over the economy. It’s not explicitly AI but addresses the same issues. Published in 1952, it was Vonneguts first novel and a real product of the post war era.[1] Another interesting read that addresses these themes is “Manna – Two Views of Humanity’s Future” by Marshal Brain [2] [1] https://antilogicalism.com/wp-content/uploads/20…

It’s a good book but I didn’t agree that the big problem would be men lacking meaning because they didn’t have to work. They had families, homes and food. They could have devoted themselves to personal improvement, art, sports, their kids, whatever. I’d love to have security and no job. I’d be full to the brim with meaning and satisfaction.

Are you sure you would thrive without a job long term? I know it's very easy to feel that way when you're working because your pay is proof that you're doing something valuable, the requirement to do your job even when you don't feel like it ensures you don't fall into a spiral of laziness, and you don't have to face the inevitably worse reality of actually doing those things you want instead of just imagining them. What direction would you even go in and what force would continue to drive you even after your kids have grown up and there's nothing of value you can do for another human? Personal improvement in what direction? Be better at coping without external validation?

There are sayings like "If you want something done, ask a busy person to do it" and "success breeds success". I have plenty of life experience that appears to confirm these in myself and others I know.

Re: A taxonomy of omnicidal futures involving artificial intelligence (2025)

#45

Post by linkregister »

estearum wrote: post #35
serf wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

no, the point is that you'd be in a ceaseless never-ending panic if you cared or related the hobbies of 'some' people to mean anything in real life.

And inversely, you'd be in a state of complete unactionable aloofness if you didn't care or failed to relate the hobbies of "some" people to mean anything in real life. A smart person in 2014: "Some people are getting addicted to fentanyl" Me, smugly: " Some is doing heavy lifting. I therefore do not need to engage with anything being discussed here."

Being unwilling to compare degrees or amounts is not a flex.

Re: A taxonomy of omnicidal futures involving artificial intelligence (2025)

#46

Post by devindotcom »

le-mark wrote: post #8

I recently read Kurt Vonnegut “Player Piano”, a novel that addresses automation taking over the economy. It’s not explicitly AI but addresses the same issues. Published in 1952, it was Vonneguts first novel and a real product of the post war era.[1] Another interesting read that addresses these themes is “Manna – Two Views of Humanity’s Future” by Marshal Brain [2] [1] https://antilogicalism.com/wp-content/uploads/20…

Great book.

But if you want some even earlier forward-thinking stuff, look up Forster's "The Machine Stops." It's not a full book, more a novella if it's even that. Extremely prescient!

And of course if you haven't read the relevant portions of Butler's "Erewhon," it's remarkable how closely they map onto today's issues. He kind of takes Thoreau's "Lo, men have become the tools of their tools" a few more stops down the line.

Re: A taxonomy of omnicidal futures involving artificial intelligence (2025)

#47

Post by estearum »

linkregister wrote: post #45
estearum wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And inversely, you'd be in a state of complete unactionable aloofness if you didn't care or failed to relate the hobbies of "some" people to mean anything in real life. A smart person in 2014: "Some people are getting addicted to fentanyl" Me, smugly: " Some is doing heavy lifting. I therefore do not need to engage with anything being discussed here."

Being unwilling to compare degrees or amounts is not a flex.

Huh? Very few people in 2014 were addicted to fentanyl. It was a non-issue. No reason for anyone to have been concerned about it if just "some" people were using it.

Degrees or amounts is actually not the relevant bit in either the AI-partners trend or the fentanyl trend in 2014. The relevant information is 1) the steepness of that curve and 2) the predicted scale at which the market saturates.

Fentanyl, being an extremely cheap, extremely potent drug that's easy to manufacture and move around, had a big market. As the curve picked up steepness, smart people identified correctly that some people getting hooked on it was a worrisome sign.

AI-partners, being an innovation that is readily available, falling in cost, and especially compelling to a population that is increasingly phone-addicted and socially atomized, is a trend worth paying very close attention to. Dismissing it on the basis of it being just "some" people is profoundly lazy.

Re: A taxonomy of omnicidal futures involving artificial intelligence (2025)

#48

Post by ctoth »

foxglacier wrote: post #44
idontwantthis wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s a good book but I didn’t agree that the big problem would be men lacking meaning because they didn’t have to work. They had families, homes and food. They could have devoted themselves to personal improvement, art, sports, their kids, whatever. I’d love to have security and no job. I’d be full to the brim with meaning and satisfaction.

Are you sure you would thrive without a job long term? I know it's very easy to feel that way when you're working because your pay is proof that you're doing something valuable, the requirement to do your job even when you don't feel like it ensures you don't fall into a spiral of laziness, and you don't have to face the inevitably worse reality of actually doing those things you want instead of just imagining them.…

> what force would continue to drive you even after your kids have grown up and there's nothing of value you can do for another human?

Building things I'm interested in with and for people I care about. That might look like code or gardening or relationships or all sorts of things. There's so much to do. So many things to want to get out of bed for, and for the days when there aren't, slow cozy mornings are nice too.

Why do you suppose there will be nothing of value you can do for another human just because the machines are better/faster at most things? Just caring about someone without being programmed to will seem to become quite the most valuable thing?

Re: A taxonomy of omnicidal futures involving artificial intelligence (2025)

#49

Post by willy_k »

narrator wrote: post #41
estebarb wrote: post #31

I don't understand why almost always the AI doomerism needs to give embodiment the AI. Real life is not a movie needing visual effects. AI doesn't need a body of itself to became dangerous. A politician could get into ChatGPT induced psychosis, that doesn't require a physical body, and it could happen now or even 3 years ago... I'm sure it has already happen... Other pointed risks are interesting because they are bas…

I like to think that all the crazy kids running around doing stupid and disruptive things for TikTok views is an early form of AI autonomously inducing mass psychosis.

That’s been a thing since before TikTok even, well before AI in any modern sense of the word, and at this point the stupidness and disruptiveness is considerably reduced from those days.

Re: A taxonomy of omnicidal futures involving artificial intelligence (2025)

#50

Post by Nursie »

foxglacier wrote: post #44
idontwantthis wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s a good book but I didn’t agree that the big problem would be men lacking meaning because they didn’t have to work. They had families, homes and food. They could have devoted themselves to personal improvement, art, sports, their kids, whatever. I’d love to have security and no job. I’d be full to the brim with meaning and satisfaction.

Are you sure you would thrive without a job long term? I know it's very easy to feel that way when you're working because your pay is proof that you're doing something valuable, the requirement to do your job even when you don't feel like it ensures you don't fall into a spiral of laziness, and you don't have to face the inevitably worse reality of actually doing those things you want instead of just imagining them.…

Outside of work I am a hobby brewer, I have a lot of home maintenance that needs doing, and landscaping that uses up a lot of my time.

Give me stability and no job, I'm still going to be a busy person.

These things have value and satisfaction for me.

Post reply on HN