After Humans Fade, Which AGI Future Is 'Better'? A Three-Way Debate
danfaggella · x · 2026-11-13
AI researcher Dan Faggella poses a thought experiment: assume AI adoption is rampant and cannot be curtailed, people symbiotize with it, bio-humans participate briefly, but within less than a generation they are no longer part of the unfolding mix. Under those circumstances, he asks which future is "better":
- Let it all burn — other creatures and digital minds have no moral relevance, so if humans are gone, nothing matters;
- Utilitronium conversion — AI turns Earth into utilitronium, maximizing sentient wellbeing per joule of energy;
- Continue the living process — AGI enhances the generative living process that began before the single cell and keeps unfolding toward more power, experience, access to nature, and thriving for life itself.
The post ends as an open question, framing a debate over post-human value alignment and anthropocentrism.
More from AGI Musings
- Oxford Intersections reopens call on AI & Relationships, abstracts due Dec 31 — dioscuri · 2026-11-13
- Leslie Pack Kaelbling to Debate Pure Behavior Learning vs Runtime Rationality in Robotics at Vector Institute — VectorInst · 2026-11-13
- Economists crunch METR data: no convincing evidence of an intelligence explosion yet — soumitrashukla9 · 2026-11-13
- Professor asks Claude to price a bare-bones college: still $20,389 a year — _akpiper · 2026-11-13
- As agentic AI hits superhuman speed, 'meaningful human oversight' may become an illusion — LuizaJarovsky · 2026-11-13
- Skeptic view: RL scaling is just compiler feedback plus IP siphoning — yacineMTB · 2026-11-13