Debate Over Successionism: Is "More Intelligence = Better" an Argument for Replacing Humanity?
jd_pressman · x · 2026-10-16
jdpressman weighs into a debate on successionism. He argues Yudkowsky's Sequences-era writing, including the orthogonality thesis, remains a strong argument against naive successionism — the default outcome of "more intelligence = better" is boring and unappealing. The case against a more careful coercive posthumanism is simpler: people's lives have value and killing them is bad. He compares causing WW3 and killing 99% of existing humans to Richard Sutton-style successionism, deeming WW3 worse as a more intentionally destructive action.
Related event: Researcher jd_pressman Rejects Successionism in AI Alignment Debate(9 posts)→
More from AGI Musings
- Grady Booch: LLMs can't reason, P(doom) near zero, real fear is power-grabbing billionaires — Grady_Booch · 2026-10-16
- Vals AI test: 6 personal agents pursue a £350 refund aggressively after user goes silent — ricklamers · 2026-10-16
- OpenAI's internal model shows real math "research taste," experts say its proofs go beyond prior literature — cong_ml · 2026-10-16
- willcb: AI's endpoint looks like faster, cheaper human-reasoning-on-chip — willcb · 2026-10-16
- AI Alignment's Problem May Be Its Researchers Are Too High-Functioning — teortaxesTex · 2026-10-16
- This vintage-style 'linguistic evolution' chart showing computers breaking humanity's language ceiling is going viral in AI circles — repligate · 2026-10-16