Thread

1. wewewedxfgdf · 1791070718 · focus · HN ↗

   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.

   1. Sharlin · 1791070986 · focus · HN ↗

      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.

      1. wewewedxfgdf · 1791071092 · focus · HN ↗

         Still too hand wavey - "some super bad virus and AI makes every human on earth infected".

         Unless you can detail exactly how this happens its still complete science fiction.

         1. Sharlin · 1791073496 · focus · HN ↗

            It’s easy to never have to change your mind about anything if you insist on unreasonable enough standard of evidence. It’s, like, one of the oldest tricks in the book. Luckily, it’s not like there’s any need to try to change your mind in particular.

            1. wewewedxfgdf · 1791074695 · focus · HN ↗

               >> if you insist on unreasonable enough standard of evidence

               One single plausible scenario is not an unreasonable thing to ask for - just one.

               If a politician/celebrity/tech person with significant influence/power claims that something might end humanity then they absolutely have the utterly minimal standard of evidence which is to describe one single realistic plausible mechanism at a detailed level that might lead to the worst possible thing ever to happen.

               1. reasonableklout · 1791078463 · focus · HN ↗

                  I expect they are not to your very high standards of &quot;non-handwavey, detail exactly how it happens&quot;, but this paper from Andrew Critch and Jacob Tsimerman describes 5 different scenarios where catastrophic human casualties occur as a result of AI either being misused or going out of control: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;arxiv.org&#x2F;pdf&#x2F;2507.09369" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;arxiv.org&#x2F;pdf&#x2F;2507.09369

                  I find the scenarios quite plausible, especially section (3a), which examines the consequences of a global war involving mostly autonomous drone militaries (which is a reality many states appear to be heading towards, following on lessons from the Ukraine war).

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.