Faggella is a very interesting AI commentator, as he's very clearly internalized the large-scale Landian accelerationist dynamics driving the core of modern technocapitalism. In this article, Faggella lists a clear breakdown of why life as we know it, embodied presence as Homo Sapiens on Earth, is almost certainly going to come to an end within the next couple generations. You can evaluate Faggella's arguments for yourself, but I find them convincing.
FAGGELLA, styled according to his own flamboyantly self-aggrandizing website, does at least serve as an interesting directory of ideas. Specifically, ideas around hard takeoff and AI maximalism; he fits alongside Yud, AI 2027, etc.
But let's turn his article into a testable prediction: > I’m going to argue that humanity has remarkably short timelines – maybe 1-2 decades at most – to either be destroyed or to transform into something very much other than our present hominid form.
OK, so lets say he's right if by 2045 the earth has fewer than 5 billion normal "homonid form" people on it. That would count as destroyed or transformed within "2 decades at most".
I will bet him any amount of money that this is wrong. Pay into my 401k, faggella. This is clickbait & won't happen.
--
Beyond that, his argument is a kitchen sink of things that are either very well-trodden (AI runaway, misalignment, misuse, US-China conflict) or totally irrelevant.
Under "Forces of Transformation" he lists VR and "Competency Crisis / Idiocracy". Some subpopulation spending all day in an AI-generated gooniverse customized to their pleasure? Could happen, sure. Gradual average IQ loss due to dysgenic fertility patterns? Happening already. But both of these are irrelevant to his argument. Neither of these is even remotely fast-acting or acute enough to result in destruction or replacement of humanity as we know it within 20 years.
So what are we left with? A bait-and-switch in the same vein as those "climate change will end the world" articles from a few years ago. The headline is about GLOBAL DOOM WITHIN OUR LIFETIME. The body of the article is a smattering of factoids, or in this case, vague black-mirror musings.
>lets say he's right if by 2045 the earth has fewer than 5 billion normal "homonid form" people I think if you specify that the "fewer than 5 billion normal "homonid form" people" can't be just people who spend all their time in VR and never go outside he'd take that bet at even odds.
"Under "Forces of Transformation" he lists VR and "Competency Crisis / Idiocracy". Some subpopulation spending all day in an AI-generated gooniverse customized to their pleasure? Could happen, sure. Gradual average IQ loss due to dysgenic fertility patterns? Happening already. But both of these are irrelevant to his argument. Neither of these is even remotely fast-acting or acute enough to result in destruction or replacement of humanity as we know it within 20 years."
I think the key part of his argument is at least some AI progress sufficient to speed up tech development such that real immersive VR happens within a decade. I personally think this is a pretty safe bet, given that realtime 3d environment generation is already happening with some of the Google models. The dysgenics isn't really relevant here, I agree it's a weak point.
Since when are people who spend all their time in VR and don't go outside not "normal hominids"? Transhumanists haec been continually lowering the bar for decades, I see.