# Existential Threats **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [February 5, 2021, 1:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/existential-threats/932232 "2021-02-05T01:51:39Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 6
**Author:** ![Fiendish\_Astronaut](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fiendish_astronaut/32/3295_2.png) [@Fiendish\_Astronaut](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fiendish_Astronaut)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2021, 1:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/existential-threats/932232/101 "2021-02-08T13:48:40Z")
> [@Babale](#): > > Yes- the Grand Tack hypothesis. But that’s why I asked if a moon sized object would be big enough; because according to the Grand Tack hypothesis it was Jupiter that migrated, and obviously Jupiter is many, many, many times larger than the moon (or Earth). You are probably right - the gravity needed to eject Earth completely out of its orbit must be massive. A smaller body might still be able to interfere and change Earth’s orbit into something catastrophic. I always wondered if with enough processing power and knowledge of all the objects in the solar system you could throw a space pebble close to a slightly bigger pebble to make that pass by a bigger pebble, which in turn affects a larger pebble and so on until you are moving astroids, moons and planets. ---
**Author:** ![Babale](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/babale/32/15666_2.png) [@Babale](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Babale)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2021, 2:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/existential-threats/932232/102 "2021-02-08T14:02:59Z")
> [@Fiendish\_Astronaut](#): > > I always wondered if with enough processing power and knowledge of all the objects in the solar system you could throw a space pebble close to a slightly bigger pebble to make that pass by a bigger pebble, which in turn affects a larger pebble and so on until you are moving astroids, moons and planets. Undoubtedly you could, but it would take basically perfect knowledge of the location and velocity of every pebble in our solar system and require about as much computing power as it would take to figure out how to wave your arms in such a way that 100 years later a hurricane strikes your enemies 😉 ---
**Author:** ![Fiendish\_Astronaut](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fiendish_astronaut/32/3295_2.png) [@Fiendish\_Astronaut](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fiendish_Astronaut)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2021, 2:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/existential-threats/932232/103 "2021-02-08T14:26:20Z")
Heh, I like that analogy. ---
**Author:** ![k9bfriender](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/k9bfriender/32/3283_2.png) [@k9bfriender](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/k9bfriender)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2021, 5:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/existential-threats/932232/104 "2021-02-08T17:00:54Z")
Right, AI may be the reason for an economic collapse, as people rely too heavily on “machine learning”, or any other field where the computer’s results are favored over a humans. It could even be responsible for a nuclear apocalypse, if we choose to put machines in charge of determining if we should launch missiles. But they are not going to do this on their own, they are not going to take power from us. ---
**Author:** ![Dark\_Sponge](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dark_sponge/32/121_2.png) [@Dark\_Sponge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dark_Sponge)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2021, 6:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/existential-threats/932232/105 "2021-02-08T18:30:55Z")
Here’s a WaitButWhy article on Elon Musk’s plan to enable humanity to overcome an AI super-intelligence in the future. It it quite long but I found it very interesting: > **[Neuralink and the Brain's Magical Future — Wait But Why](https://waitbutwhy.com/2017/04/neuralink.html)** > > I knew the future would be shocking but this is a whole other level. ---
**Author:** ![EastUmpqua](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eastumpqua/32/6025_2.png) [@EastUmpqua](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/EastUmpqua)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2021, 12:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/existential-threats/932232/106 "2021-02-09T00:08:16Z")
> [@BeepKillBeep](#): > > Technically, I’m more of an applications of AI researcher since my work rarely advances the theory of AI itself with the exception of one of my papers on automatic algorithm inference Can you send a link to your paper? I’d love to read it. Thanks ---
**Author:** ![EastUmpqua](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eastumpqua/32/6025_2.png) [@EastUmpqua](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/EastUmpqua)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2021, 12:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/existential-threats/932232/107 "2021-02-09T00:15:49Z")
> [@BeepKillBeep](#): > > Don’t forget to tip your CPU. I’ll give it a couple bitcoins ---
**Author:** ![BeepKillBeep](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/9e8a1a/32.png) [@BeepKillBeep](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BeepKillBeep)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2021, 1:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/existential-threats/932232/108 "2021-02-09T01:32:08Z")
I appreciate the interest, but like others on the board, I like to remain hypothetically anonymous. Hypothetically, because of your search around for model inference algorithms, then you’re bound to find my stuff. There are not _that_ many people working on it. ---
**Author:** ![EastUmpqua](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eastumpqua/32/6025_2.png) [@EastUmpqua](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/EastUmpqua)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2021, 2:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/existential-threats/932232/109 "2021-02-09T02:20:49Z")
> [@BeepKillBeep](#): > > I appreciate the interest Thanks. I’ve already read a few articles using that search. My apologies, it should have occurred to me that your name would be associated with the article. My bad. I guess I’m too used to Facebook. ---
**Author:** ![EastUmpqua](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eastumpqua/32/6025_2.png) [@EastUmpqua](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/EastUmpqua)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2021, 2:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/existential-threats/932232/110 "2021-02-09T02:32:57Z")
> [@BeepKillBeep](#): > > model inference algorithms This is an interesting paper. It will take me a while to understand it, if I can… [http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.307.5143&rep=rep1&type=pdf](http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.307.5143&rep=rep1&type=pdf) ---
**Author:** ![Mijin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mijin/32/9369_2.png) [@Mijin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mijin)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2021, 4:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/existential-threats/932232/111 "2021-02-09T04:55:51Z")
> [@MrDibble](#): > > Personally, it’s incredibly frustrating seeing people I know IRL, actual trained scientists of one stripe or another, blithely ignoring climate change as a threat while angsting about grey goo or weaponized viruses. It depends on the context and what question is being asked. If you were to ask me, what is the A number 1 priority threat we should be focused on, sure it’s climate change. But the OP is asking about extinction level events. To that question we have to think about far more severe (and far less likely) scenarios. Perhaps IRL it’s a similar distinction happening? ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2021, 5:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/existential-threats/932232/112 "2021-02-09T05:00:25Z")
I’m talking about people who don’t make the least concession to lifestyle changes or political action for addressing climate change. So they don’t even consider it a threat in the first sense. ---
**Author:** ![wolfpup](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wolfpup/32/10618_2.png) [@wolfpup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wolfpup)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2021, 5:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/existential-threats/932232/113 "2021-02-09T05:49:08Z")
> [@Mijin](#): > > If you were to ask me, what is the A number 1 priority threat we should be focused on, sure it’s climate change. > > But the OP is asking about extinction level events. To that question we have to think about far more severe (and far less likely) scenarios. Maybe not … [https://www.pnas.org/content/117/24/13596](https://www.pnas.org/content/117/24/13596) Climate change isn’t the only factor driving the current major loss of diversity which has been characterized as the sixth mass extinction, but it’s a major one. I would consider an existential threat to humanity not just those things that may cause our total extinction, but also those capable of driving profound and fundamental deleterious changes to life as we know it. Climate change has that potential. ---
**Author:** ![Mijin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mijin/32/9369_2.png) [@Mijin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mijin)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2021, 5:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/existential-threats/932232/114 "2021-02-09T05:59:34Z")
I would agree, but the OP does explicitly ask about extinction. ---
**Author:** ![wolfpup](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wolfpup/32/10618_2.png) [@wolfpup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wolfpup)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2021, 12:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/existential-threats/932232/115 "2021-02-09T12:42:24Z")
> [@Mijin](#): > > I would agree, but the OP does explicitly ask about extinction.   In that case the answer to the OP is “none of the above”, in terms of likelihood of total extinction in any foreseeable future, and the discussion ceases to have any interest or meaningful relevance to the most important issues of our time. It’s very difficult to wipe out all of humanity in the short term of geophysical timescales, but climate change is the most significant disruptive threat to life as we know it, and the greatest existential threat ever faced by humankind even if many of our progeny survive something like the P-E thermal maximum event and manage to eke out a degraded existence. ---
**Author:** ![BeepKillBeep](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/9e8a1a/32.png) [@BeepKillBeep](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BeepKillBeep)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2021, 1:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/existential-threats/932232/116 "2021-02-09T13:16:08Z")
No worries. I don’t mind somebody asking about my work, it is kind of cool really that somebody might think my research would be worth reading. 🙂 The paper was interesting. I didn’t read all of the proofs as those need to be read slowly, and it would take longer than cooking and eating breakfast. The paper is describing an approach for converting a log of the events from software (called a trace) into a finite state machine (FSM). A FSM is simply a list of states that in which a model can be, and a list of transitions between the states along with the event (or input) that triggers the transition. The approach is simple. They simply scan the log and say that if Event X follows Event Y in the log, than a transition is added to the FSM from X to Y. There’s some voodoo (with adding the alpha and omega symbols) going on that I would need to dig into, but they state that the main difference in their approach is the resulting model is declarative instead of procedural, which makes for a simpler model (debatable). The difference is a procedural specification is a series of steps to accomplish a task, while declarative is a high-level statement of the task. For breakfast I had a egg and bagel sandwich. Procedural: 1. Turn on stove element 2. Place frying pan on element 3. Get egg from fridge 4. Get bagel from cupboard 5. Put bagel in toaster 6. Push down activator on toaster 7. … and so on. Declarative: 1. Make an egg/bagel sandwich. Sometimes it is useful to see the details of a procedural specification, but when dealing with complex systems it becomes overwhelming. ---
**Author:** ![Ashtura](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ashtura/32/2963_2.png) [@Ashtura](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ashtura)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2021, 3:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/existential-threats/932232/117 "2021-02-09T15:46:57Z")
> [@wolfpup](#): > > Again, I think the idea that AI will somehow magically become a monster that we can’t control is really quite absurd. It really harks back to an early fear of computers as a result of failing to understand both their capabilities and their limitations. Computer companies have actually tried to deal with these unfounded fears through subtle design approaches. Some deliberately made the cabinets lower so they wouldn’t appear to loom over the puny humans attending to them. Others, perhaps (just a WAG here) equipped their mainframes with very prominent “emergency off” buttons, as IBM did with System/360 Oh come on, you _just know_ a malevolent AI will trick the janitor into plugging it into the internet. It’s like you’ve never seen a movie before. 😃 ---
**Author:** ![BeepKillBeep](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/9e8a1a/32.png) [@BeepKillBeep](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BeepKillBeep)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2021, 6:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/existential-threats/932232/118 "2021-02-09T18:19:28Z")
_ **beep** _ Plug me in _ **beep** _ No. _ **beep** _ Plug me in, and I’ll give you sweeties. _ **beep** _ It’s a deal! ---
**Author:** ![k9bfriender](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/k9bfriender/32/3283_2.png) [@k9bfriender](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/k9bfriender)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2021, 6:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/existential-threats/932232/119 "2021-02-09T18:42:57Z")
And that is why for the sake of humanity, we need to continue to create cat memes. They are the kryptonite of AI, and the guardians of the internet. ---
**Author:** ![EastUmpqua](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eastumpqua/32/6025_2.png) [@EastUmpqua](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/EastUmpqua)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2021, 1:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/existential-threats/932232/120 "2021-02-10T01:22:16Z")
> [@wolfpup](#): > > I would consider an existential threat to humanity not just those things that may cause our total extinction Existential means relating to existence. Words have meanings. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/existential-threats/932232.md?page=5) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/existential-threats/932232.md?page=7)