I was having a conversation with my friend about this. We were discussing AI and she believes AI will destroy all of humanity just like so many others. I personally don’t believe that. I’m aware of all the theories and the multitude of ways that it could happen and I understand that with AI, in theory we wouldn’t understand its goals so we wouldn’t know how it would destroy us but again, that’s just a theory.
There’s also the constant fear of massive nuclear holocaust with WWIII but I also don’t believe that we’d realistically get to a point where we’d use Nukes on each other knowing the implications of what would happen. But it made me realize that we’re constantly fearful of mass extinction. To the point where some people fight tooth and nail and will not try to look at things from a more positive or optimistic perspective. It’s all death or you’re wrong.
Please help me understand this. I’m here with open ears.
What qualifies a physicist to discuss the immortality of a civilization?
Here, indulge.
An per your question: the same that qualifies you or me, which is being alive and capable of observe and extrapolate possible outcomes through thinking.
You’d be surprised by most people’s ability to do so.
It’s sad how stupid people are full of certainty while the intelligent are always full of doubt.
That is the biggest concern we should have.
Then why are we taking their opinion over our own?
Typically, when people cite something like that, they defer to an expert in that field. In this case, maybe an anthropologist? There’s nothing in the training to be a physicist that prepares them to understand the early stages of civilizations forming, let alone is longevity.
Have you read the article?