• Strider@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    2 days ago

    Don’t forget the environment. Statistics have been massively wonky for a few years now with massive derailing happening this year (eg https://climatereanalyzer.org/clim/sst_daily/?dm_id=world2). At the rate we’re going it is more likely to be surprising we’ll not have some events with massive death tolls until 2100.

    But yeah, AI might cause suffering but won’t be any sci-fi doomsday scenario without some human driving it (point being less an AI issue but more on the political/regulation side. Anything else just beintlg the medium to oppress with power).

    • tal@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 days ago

      It was intentional not to include it. I don’t think that global warming likely poses an existential threat. It may impose high costs on humanity, greater than the benefit of burning fossil fuels, and thus be something that we want to avoid, but I don’t think that we’d likely put ourselves in a scenario where humanity doesn’t survive.

      Existential threats are specifically those that end humanity’s existence.

      • Strider@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 days ago

        I think it depends on the detail definition, then.

        Nevertheless I think you’d be severely underestimating the impact, but I still absolutely hope you’re right.