The Genuine Existential Risk Of AI: Why It's Not Just Speculation — But Morally Correct

there’s a certain doomsday cult called longtermism, mainly for rich libretarians in silicon valley who doens’t have to worry puny pesant concepts, like employment, rent, or food. this is because poor people are subhuman and don’t deserve rights.

poverty will only kill like, a billion people in 2030 (source: i made it up), which is a finite amount of people. the end of the world will kill all of humanity, which is an infinite number. clearly, infinity will always be larger than any finite number. as perfectly rational beings, it is morally wrong to care about anything other than the end of the world, which makes longtermism the only morally good ideology.

it’s good that people are about climate change but 100% confirmed and 100 years is too short term. nay, we need to think further, what if we go to mars and there are space parasites, what if we invent super duper powerful ai and they enslave us all. oh look claude code exists now, we gotta adjust our calculations. we’re getting agi in 2027, we’re are all doomed, we are all gonna die, all because we didn’t donate enough money to ai alignment charities (* this is a forecast, there is no evidence that we will be correct, but the ends justify all the means). something something china, i love sucking uncle sam’s cock, glory to israel.

you know, these fuckers might actually end the world in a self fufilling prophecy.

fear not, the last bastion of humanity is the anti ai movement. the kind of people who think vaccines give autism. good luck.

i hate how society is held together by a fragile equilibrium between wrong and wrong.