Latest news with #humanity
Forbes
4 days ago
- Science
- Forbes
If AI Doesn't Wipe Us Out It Might Actually Make Us Stronger
AI doomers believe that advanced AI is an existential risk and will seek to kill all humanity, but ... More if we manage to survive — will we be stronger for doing so? In today's column, I explore the sage advice that what doesn't kill you will supposedly make you stronger. I'm sure you've heard that catchphrase many times. An inquisitive reader asked me whether this same line applies to the worrisome prediction that AI will one day wipe out humanity. In short, if AI isn't successful in doing so, does that suggest that humanity will be stronger accordingly? Let's talk about it. This analysis of an innovative AI breakthrough is part of my ongoing Forbes column coverage on the latest in AI including identifying and explaining various impactful AI complexities (see the link here). Humankind Is On The List I recently examined the ongoing debate between the AI doomers and the AI accelerationists. For in-depth details on the ins and outs of the two contrasting perspectives, see my elaboration at the link here. The discourse goes this way. AI doomers are convinced that AI will ultimately be so strong and capable that the AI will decide to get rid of humans. The reasons that AI won't want us are varied, of which perhaps the most compelling is that humanity would be the biggest potential threat to AI. Humans could scheme and possibly find a means of turning off AI or otherwise defeating AI. The AI accelerationists emphasize that AI is going to be immensely valuable to humankind. They assert that AI will be able to find a cure for cancer, solve world hunger, and be an all-around boost to cope with human exigencies. The faster or sooner that we get to very advanced AI, the happier we will be since solutions to our societal problems will be closer at hand. A reader has asked me whether the famous line that what doesn't kill you makes you stronger would apply in this circumstance. If the AI doomer prediction comes to pass, but we manage to avoid getting utterly destroyed, would this imply that humanity will be stronger as a result of that incredible feat of survival? I always appreciate such thoughtful inquiries and figured that I would address the matter so that others can engage in the intriguing puzzle. Assumption That AI Goes After Us One quick point is that if AI doesn't try to squish us like a bug, and instead AI is essentially neutral or benevolent as per the AI accelerationist viewpoint, or that we can control AI and it never mounts a realistic threat, the question about becoming stronger seems out of place. Let's then take the resolute position that the element of becoming stronger is going to arise solely when AI overtly seeks to get rid of us. A smarmy retort might be that we could nonetheless become stronger even if the AI isn't out to destroy us. Yes, I get that, thanks. The argument though is that the revered line consists of what doesn't kill you will make you stronger. I am going to interpret that line to mean that something must first aim to wipe you out. Only then if you survive will you be stronger. The adage can certainly be interpreted in other ways, but I think it is most widely accepted in that frame of reference. Paths Of Humankind Destruction Envision that AI makes an all-out attempt to eradicate humankind. This is the ultimate existential risk about AI that everyone keeps bringing up. Some refer to this as 'P(doom)' which means the probability of doom, or that AI zonks us entirely. How would it attain this goal? Lots of possibilities exist. The advanced form of AI, perhaps artificial general intelligence (AGI) or maybe the further progressed artificial super intelligence (ASI) could strike in obvious and non-obvious ways. AGI is AI that is considered on par with human intellect and can seemingly match our intelligence. ASI is AI that has gone beyond human intellect and would be superior in many if not all feasible ways. The idea is that ASI would be able to run circles around humans by outthinking us at every turn. For more details on the nature of AI, AGI, and ASI, see my analysis at the link here. An obvious approach to killing humanity would be to launch nuclear arsenals that might cause a global conflagration. It might also inspire humans to go against other humans. Thus, AI simply triggers the start of something, and humanity ensures that the rest of the path is undertaken. Boom, drop the mic. This might not be especially advantageous for AI. You see, suppose that AI gets wiped out in the same process. Are we to assume that AI is willing to sacrifice itself in order to do away with humanity? A twist that often is not considered consists of AI presumably wanting to achieve self-survival. If AGI or ASI are so smart that they aim to destroy us and have a presumably viable means to do so, wouldn't it seem that AI also wants to remain intact and survive beyond the demise of humanity? That seems a reasonable assumption. A non-obvious way of getting rid of us would be to talk us into self-destruction. Think about the current use of generative AI. You carry on discussions with AI. Suppose the AI ganged up and started telling the populace at scale to wipe each other out. Perhaps humanity would be spurred by this kind of messaging. The AI might even provide some tips or hints on how to do so, providing clever means that this would still keep AI intact. On a related tangent, I've been extensively covering the qualms that AI is dispensing mental health guidance on a population level and we don't know what this is going to do in the long term, see the link here. Verge Of Destruction But We Live Anyway Assume that humanity miraculously averts the AI assault. How did we manage to do so? It could be that we found ways to control AI and render AI safer on a go-forward basis. The hope of humanity is that with those added controls and safety measures, we can continue to harness the goodness of AI and mitigate or prevent AI from badness. For more about the importance of ongoing research and practice associated with AI safety and security, see my coverage at the link here. Would that count as an example of making us stronger? I am going to vote for Yes. We would be stronger by being better able to harness AI to positive ends. We would be stronger due to discovering new ways to avoid AI evildoing. It's a twofer. Another possibility is that we became a globally unified force of humankind. In other words, we set aside all other divisions and opted to work together to survive and defeat the AI attack. Imagine that. It seems reminiscent of those sci-fi movies where outer space aliens try to get us and luckily, we harmonize to focus on the external enemies. Whether the unification of humanity would remain after having overcome the AI is hard to say. Perhaps, over some period of time, our resolve to be unified will weaken. In any case, it seems fair to say that for at least a while we would be stronger. Stronger in the long run? Can't say for sure. There are more possibilities of how we might stay alive. One that's a bit outsized is that we somehow improve our own intellect and outsmart the AI accordingly. The logic for this is that maybe we rise to the occasion. We encounter AI that is as smart or smarter than us. Hidden within us is a capacity that we've never tapped into. The capability is that we can enhance our intelligence, and now, faced with the existential crisis, this indeed finally awakens, and we prevail. That appears to be an outlier option, but it would seem to make us stronger. What Does Stronger Entail All in all, it seems that if we do survive, we are allowed to wear the badge of honor that we are stronger for having done so. Maybe so, maybe not. There are AI doomers who contend humankind won't necessarily be entirely destroyed. You see, AI might decide to enslave some or all of humanity and keep a few of us around (for some conjecture on this, see my comments at the link here). This brings up a contemplative question. If humans survive but are enslaved by AI, can we truly proclaim that humankind is stronger in that instance? Mull that over. Another avenue is that humans live but it is considered a pyrrhic victory. That type of victory is one where there is a great cost, and the end result isn't endearing. Suppose that we beat the AI. Yay. Suppose this pushes us back into the stone age. Society is in ruins. We have barely survived. Are we stronger? I've got a bunch more of these. For example, imagine that we overcame AI, but it had little if anything to do with our own fortitude. Maybe the AI self-destructs inadvertently. We didn't do it, the AI did. Do we deserve the credit? Are we stronger? An argument can be made that maybe we would be weaker. Why so? It could be that we are so congratulatory on our success that we believe it was our ingenious effort that prevented humankind's destruction. As a result, we march forward blindly and ultimately rebuild AI. The next time around, the AI realizes the mistake it made last time and the next time it finishes the job. Putting Our Minds To Work I'm sure that some will decry that this whole back-and-forth on this topic is ridiculous. They will claim that AI is never going to reach that level of capability. Thus, the argument has no reasonable basis at all. Those in the AI accelerationists camp might say that the debate is unneeded because we will be able to suitably control and harness AI. The existential risk is going to be near zero. In that case, this is a lot of nonsense over something that just won't arise. The AI doomers would likely acknowledge that the aforementioned possibilities might happen. Their beef with the discussion would probably be that arguing over whether humans will be stronger if we survive is akin to debating the placement of chairs on the deck of the Titanic. Don't be fretting about the stronger dilemma. Instead, put all our energy into the prevention of AI doomsday. Is all this merely a sci-fi imaginary consideration? Stephen Hawking said this: 'The development of full artificial intelligence could spell the end of the human race.' There are a lot of serious-minded people who truly believe we ought to be thinking mindfully about where we are headed with AI. A new mantra might be that the stronger we think about AI and the future, the stronger we will all be. The strongest posture would presumably be as a result of our being so strong that no overwhelming AI threats have a chance of emerging. Let's indeed vote for human strength.
The Guardian
4 days ago
- Entertainment
- The Guardian
Justin Bieber to Human: the week in rave reviews
BBC iPlayer Summed up in a sentence Explorer, paleoanthropologist and standup comedian Ella Al-Shamahi delivers a wonder-filled, joyful look at the origins of humanity that is never short of fascinating. What our reviewer said 'It feels as if a presenting star is being born here.' Jack Seale Read the full review Further reading 'Forever chemicals' are killing whales – and harming us U&Alibi Summed up in a sentence Mark Gatiss leaps into the world of cosy crime dramas as a postwar bookseller with a mysterious 'letter from Churchill' that lets him assist the police with investigations. What our reviewer said 'Bookish is a fine piece of entertainment – meticulously worked, beautifully paced and decidedly moreish. A joy.' Lucy Mangan Read the full review Further reading Mark Gatiss: 'What does Benedict Cumberbatch smell like? Strawberries' Sky Documentaries Summed up in a sentence A touching, beautiful and sad biopic of film star Jayne Mansfield, created by the daughter who lost her mother to a car crash aged three. What our reviewer said 'My Mom Jayne is tender rather than schmaltzy, compassionate rather than hagiographic and an evident labour of love for all involved.' Lucy Mangan Read the full review BBC iPlayer Summed up in a sentence A three-part retrospective of the era-defining 80s charity concerts, filled with startling archive clips and soul-baring modern-day interviews. What our reviewer said 'A fascinating portrait of a complex man's imperfect attempt to solve an impossible problem.' Jack Seale Read the full review Further reading Live Aid campaigner Bob Geldof was 'scathing about African leaders', files reveal In cinemas now Summed up in a sentence Tim Robinson is magnificently cringeworthy as a man in thrall to his cool neighbour Paul Rudd in Andrew DeYoung's comedy bromance. What our reviewer said 'This is a shaggy dog tale of ineffable silliness, operating ostensibly on the realist lines of indie US cinema but sauntering sideways from its initial premise, getting further and further from what had appeared to be a real issue: how difficult it is for grown men to make new friends.' Peter Bradshaw Read the full review Further reading 'A case study on psychosis': men on why Tim Robinson's Friendship feels a little too real In cinemas now Summed up in a sentence Jennifer Love-Hewitt and Freddie Prinze Jr return for a goofy, slickly made legacy sequel to the classic 90s slasher. What our reviewer said 'There's something charmingly deranged about this kind of hyper-specific fan service, appealing to a select few with the brash confidence that everyone knows exactly what you're talking about.' Benjamin Lee Read the full review In cinemas now Summed up in a sentence Reissue of 90s one-crazy-night clubbing comedy, a loved-up ensemble piece that is cheerfully apolitical, pro-drugs and pro-hedonism. What our reviewer said 'A reminder of that interesting 90s moment when euphoria and uncomplicated fun had cultural cachet.' Peter Bradshaw Read the full review Further reading How we made Human Traffic: 'The first question I asked in the auditions was: have you ever taken drugs?' In cinemas now Summed up in a sentence Stanley Kubrick's hypnotic masterpiece, adapted from Thackeray, follows the fluctuating fortunes of Ryan O'Neal's humble Irish hero. What our reviewer said 'Barry Lyndon is an intimate epic of utter lucidity and command. The final intertitle drily noting that all the characters are 'equal now' in death is exquisitely judged.' Peter Bradshaw Read the full review Further reading Stanley Kubrick: the Barry Lyndon archives – in pictures Mubi; available now Summed up in a sentence Gripping thriller about an Austrian ex-cage fighter called Sarah who goes to Dubai to work with three teenage sisters, and realises they are trapped. What our reviewer said 'It's easy to imagine the Hollywood version of this story, with a heroic escape orchestrated by Sarah. But Moon is gripping in its own understated way as it presents the unvarnished reality: that standing up to injustice is harder than it looks in the movies.' Cath Clarke Read the full review Out now Summed up in a sentence A black comedy about endangered snails and the Ukraine marriage industry is disrupted, in terms of both narrative and form, by Russia's full-scale invasion. What our reviewer said 'Rather than feeling distracting or tricksy, the author's intervention heightens the impact of the story, giving it a discomfiting intensity and a new, more intimate register. We all have skin in the game at this point.' Marcel Theroux Read the full review Reviewed by Lara Feigel Summed up in a sentence A flamboyant tale of fakery and forgers that delights in queering the Victorian era. What our reviewer said 'In book after book, Stevens is showing herself to be that rare thing: a writer who we can think alongside, even while she's making things up.' Read the full review Further reading Nell Stevens: penguins, paranoia and an old potato on the island of Bleaker Reviewed by Christopher Shrimpton Summed up in a sentence The perfect lives of wealthy New Yorkers are shattered by a violent act on a birthday weekend. What our reviewer said 'A bracingly honest and affectingly intimate depiction of abuse, family dynamics and self-deceit… it upends its characters' lives so ruthlessly and revealingly that it is hard not to take pleasure in a false facade being finally smashed.' Read the full review Reviewed by Joe Moran Summed up in a sentence Behind the scenes at the Guardian, 1986-1995. What our reviewer said 'Few events in these years, from the fatwa on Rushdie to the first Gulf war, failed to provoke fierce disagreements in the newsroom.' Joe Moran Read the full review Reviewed by Alex Clark Summed up in a sentence Life on the women's wards of Iran's infamous prison. What our reviewer said It is unclear how many of these dishes are materially realised within the confines of the prison, and how many are acts of fantasy, a dream of what life might be like in the future. Alex Clark Read the full review Further reading I endured Evin, Iran's most notorious jail. I can't understand how Sweden can leave its citizen to die there Out now Summed up in a sentence The London rapper and producer doubles down on his vaulting style, lurching from alt-rock to distortion and chipmunk soul on an astonishingly coherent and melodic third record. What our reviewer said 'It feels like the work of someone who has grown up with the all-you-can-eat buffet of streaming as standard, hurling contrasting ideas and inspirations at you in a way that recalls someone continually pressing fast-forward in a state of excitement … That it doesn't result in an annoying mess comes down to Legxacy's skills as a producer, which allow him to weave it all into something coherent, and to his songwriting.'. Alexis Petridis Read the full review Out now Summed up in a sentence While the sonic invention and off-kilter details remain, on his 10th album the cult musician eschews distortion for melancholic melodies and crooked love songs. What our reviewer said 'The sonic invention remains, but it is deployed with increased subtlety, serving the timeless, melancholic soft-rock rather than overpowering it.' Rachel Aroesti Read the full review Out now Summed up in a sentence Ruth Clinton of Landless and Cormac MacDiarmada and John Dermody of Lankum contrast hauntological synths with robust noise on this playful debut. What our reviewer said 'Poor Creature comprises three musicians expert in heightening and managing atmosphere … Within Clinton and MacDiarmada's dense harmonies, Dermody's drums and the track's cacophonous final minutes, you sense folk rocketing somewhere poppy, wild and new.' Jude Rogers Read the full review Further reading 'We are extreme' … how Lankum's heavy mutant folk made them Mercury favourites Out now Summed up in a sentence Bieber reverts to his first love, R&B, in what seems to be a genuine passion project. What our reviewer said 'It's all very considered, cleverly nostalgic and subtly satisfying – there's not a craven chart smash in earshot.' Rachel Aroesti Read the full review Out now Summed up in a sentence The Portuguese producer and British-Italian drummer united last year for a characterful, polyrhythmic debut; this redux sees each song remixed by a different producer, from Sherelle to Kelman Duran. What our reviewer said 'These transformations yank the source material in all kinds of different directions, from baile funk to breakbeat. My favourite is the brooding, bubbling take on the title track by Chinese producer Yu Su.' Laura Snapes Further reading 'Drumming is full of machismo, so vulgar, so dumb': Valentina Magaletti, the musician giving the underground its rhythm
The Guardian
6 days ago
- Politics
- The Guardian
My tears for the 17,000 Palestinian children killed in Gaza
In 35 years of reading the Guardian, a leader has never made me cry – until this one (The Guardian view on the children of Gaza: when 17,000 die, it's more than a mistake, 15 July). Those last six simple words – 'They were children. They were loved' – should haunt every elected member who has been complicit in this genocide. Thank you for your WhitfieldLiverpool Thank you for the moving leader. Alas, neither that nor the advert from Médecins Sans Frontières in your 11 July print edition headlined 'We're witnessing a genocide in Gaza. And the UK government is complicit', nor the voices of millions in this country, have moved the government to declare an arms embargo on Israel or recognise the state of StreetLittleborough, Greater Manchester I find it odd that the rise in the headline inflation rate was 'unexpected' (Report, 16 July). The only people who are surprised must be economic analysts. When they walk around the supermarket or order food online, are they oblivious to the constant price rises?Su HardmanWoodbridge, Suffolk Why travel to far-flung places causing so much environmental damage when the UK offers such wonderful vegan food ('Don't ever assume there's anything to eat!' 29 tips for perfect vegan holidays, from where to go to how to order, 15 July)? Beats KempShrewton, Wiltshire Don't tell Rachel Reeves, but Peter the Great taxed beards (Letters, 15 July) and the amount depended on the WaltersBuxton, Derbyshire Have an opinion on anything you've read in the Guardian today? Please email us your letter and it will be considered for publication in our letters section.
Associated Press
6 days ago
- Entertainment
- Associated Press
Voices for Humanity Treks High up Into the Himalayas to Deliver the Way to Happiness with Meena Sharma
LOS ANGELES, Calif., July 16, 2025 (SEND2PRESS NEWSWIRE) — Scientology Network's VOICES FOR HUMANITY, the weekly series presenting heroic change makers from a variety of faiths, cultures and nations, working to uplift their communities, announces a new episode featuring the work of community activist Meena Sharma, premiering on July 16, 2025. VOICES FOR HUMANITY airs Wednesdays at 8 p.m. ET/PT on Scientology Network. After a decade of civil war left Nepal's youth facing a grim future, Meena Sharma is leading a movement to reduce violence and discrimination and guide the country back to its traditional roots. ABOUT MEENA SHARMA Meena Sharma was still a child when Nepal descended into civil war, leaving the nation deeply wounded by violence and discrimination. As a volunteer teacher, she saw firsthand the toll on her students and their families. Discovering The Way to Happiness, she immediately recognized its potential as 'a powerful tool to improve anybody's way of life.' Meena founded The Way to Happiness Nepal and mobilized communities to deliver its precepts throughout the country, focusing on strengthening moral values among the nation's youth. Her work has been recognized by educators, civic leaders and government officials for guiding Nepal toward a brighter future. Meena Sharma is The Way to Happiness Ambassador Nepal. Scientology Network debuted on March 12, 2018, launched by David Miscavige, ecclesiastical leader of the Scientology religion. Since then, Scientology Network has been viewed in over 240 countries and territories worldwide in 17 languages. Satisfying the curiosity of people about Scientology, the network takes viewers across six continents, spotlighting the everyday lives of Scientologists, showing the Church as a global organization and presenting its Social Betterment programs that have touched the lives of millions worldwide. The network also showcases documentaries by independent filmmakers who represent a cross section of cultures and faiths, but share a common purpose of uplifting communities. Scientology Network's innovative content has been recognized with more than 125 industry awards, including Tellys, Communitas and Hermes Creative Awards. Broadcast from Scientology Media Productions, the Church's global media center in Los Angeles, Scientology Network is available on DIRECTV Channel 320, DIRECTV STREAM and AT&T U-verse and can be streamed at on mobile apps and via the Roku, Amazon Fire and Apple TV platforms. MEDIA CONTACT: Media Relations | [email protected] MULTIMEDIA: Photo link for media: Photo caption: Meena Sharma, founder of The Way to Happiness Nepal, treks through the Himalayas to bring hope and moral values to Nepal's youth, as featured in Scientology Network's Voices for Humanity episode premiering on July 16, 2025. NEWS SOURCE: Church of Scientology International Keywords: Religion and Churches, VOICES FOR HUMANITY, Scientology Media Productions, Meena Sharma, founder of The Way to Happiness Nepal, LOS ANGELES, Calif. This press release was issued on behalf of the news source (Church of Scientology International) who is solely responsibile for its accuracy, by Send2Press® Newswire. Information is believed accurate but not guaranteed. Story ID: S2P127791 APNF0325A To view the original version, visit: © 2025 Send2Press® Newswire, a press release distribution service, Calif., USA. RIGHTS GRANTED FOR REPRODUCTION IN WHOLE OR IN PART BY ANY LEGITIMATE MEDIA OUTLET - SUCH AS NEWSPAPER, BROADCAST OR TRADE PERIODICAL. MAY NOT BE USED ON ANY NON-MEDIA WEBSITE PROMOTING PR OR MARKETING SERVICES OR CONTENT DEVELOPMENT. Disclaimer: This press release content was not created by nor issued by the Associated Press (AP). Content below is unrelated to this news story.
The Guardian
14-07-2025
- Entertainment
- The Guardian
Human review – history at its most irresistibly infectious
'I can't help it,' says Ella Al-Shamahi. 'It reminds me of The Lord of the Rings!' It's not easy to make prehistory accessible, but a Tolkien comparison works for the time before Homo sapiens ruled the world. Al-Shamahi's five-part documentary traces the rise of humanity, beginning with the era when Homo neanderthalensis, Homo floresiensis and Homo erectus each staked a claim in their own ragged domain. Before written history, when our story was 'written in our bones and DNA', some early humans were in Europe and Asia and had adapted to the cold. Some were learning to harness the power of fire. Some were only about 3ft 6in (1 metre) tall. Others wore hard hats and polo shirts – wait, no, that is one of the archaeologists on a dig in Morocco, where a skull named Jebel Irhoud 1 holds many secrets about our early ancestors. It's the start of a journey that will, in an illuminating first episode, take Al-Shamahi to spectacular locations across Africa and the Middle East. At the risk of repeating what some critics said seven years ago when Al-Shamahi fronted Neanderthals – Meet Your Ancestors on BBC Two (she has popped up in the odd thing since then), it feels as if a presenting star is being born here. An explorer, paleoanthropologist and standup comedian, she passes all the tests that the job of helming a major science or history series throws up. Her bits to camera borrow the old Kevin McCloud trick of pretending to come up with big thoughts on the fly and being delighted by them: she will break eye contact, look away to gather something fascinating, then meet our gaze again to emphasise the key point. It's theatre, but it helps to achieve her main goal, which is to transmit the wonder she experiences as a learned expert to us, the keen but ignorant at home. The urgent whisper she employs in her voiceover – where a less adept presenter would reveal any weaknesses in their intonation – has the same effect. So we are in the company of the best teacher most of us never had, one who joyfully shares knowledge that is too interesting to be intimidating and who trusts us to keep up. Al-Shamahi is unafraid to toss in arcane paleoanthropological terms if the viewer can draw meaning from context – 'gracile' and 'prognathic' are about to slide into your vocabulary – or to converse with Moroccan scientists in Arabic. Her best work here has her cradling the Jebel Irhoud skull and using her own head to illustrate how this ancient creature is different from us, yet almost the same. Someone like Homo sapiens, the upright, tool-and-weapon-using primate that became us, existed as far back as 350,000 years ago, much earlier than was once thought. From there we trace the little breakthroughs that, put together across many millennia, constitute our evolution. Al-Shamahi visits the Great Rift valley in eastern Africa to explain how, 200,000 years ago, climate crises (it was humid in the east and arid in the west, then vice versa) forced communities to move around and mingle, sharing fresh discoveries and their best genes. In Israel, however, we find evidence of one of countless false starts, when Homo sapiens tried to live in the cave next door to neanderthals – a nightmare-neighbour scenario so bad that this branch of Homo sapiens didn't survive it. But we persevered. Al-Shamahi highlights the surprising details of how we gained hegemony. In the Tsodilo Hills of Botswana, there are stone tools that, 100,000 years ago, their owners broke. Why? Because they were offerings to a god, made by primates who were starting to 'see beyond the tangible' and were developing ceremonies and rituals nourished by abstract thought. In the words of Al-Shamahi, who can turn a lyrical phrase when it's warranted, we were 'venturing into the unknown and into the unseen'. This expansion of the brain delivered practical benefits when, only 30 or so millennia later, curiosity about 'the power held in wood and string' saw us move on from axes and spears to the bow and arrow. The programme's landscape shots are frequently stunning. On a perfectly unspoiled, dune-flanked African beach, even the tiniest seashells hold a narrative: about 70,000 years ago we started turning them into necklaces decorated with red ochre, a sign that cultural exchanges were under way. Al-Shamahi's delight in this revelation is irresistibly infectious. In Human, the leap of imagination necessary to understand our very distant past is no distance at all. Human airs on BBC Two and is available on BBC iPlayer
