What do you think the extinction of the human species will be like?

>>212542143 (OP)
Saaars chimping out and launching nukes at each other. China shits its pants and launches nukes too. Then the other nuclear powers follow suit.

>>212542143 (OP)
Sun burns out.
>>212542168
Hbombs won't stop us lmao.
We're approaching ten billion (known) people.

>>212542143 (OP)
Most wildlife goes first. Humans are pretty durable and survive the worst of climate change. The failure of agriculture is what does them in. The last man alive looks desperately at a 500 year old can of baked beans, wondering if he can grow them. In that moment, the skin cancer that has plagued humanity's last year's overtakes him, he drops the can leaving it uneaten.

>>212542202
And those ten billion, what are they going to do when the world supply chains gets fucked and most of the world is not viable for basic agriculture anymore?

>>212542202
>Sun burns out
If we ever lived enough to reach that point we wont even be human or flesh made whatsoever.
Very unlikely we outlive automation

if we're talking complete extinction, it will be an asteroid impact or a megavolcano exploding and poisoning the atmosphere. But there are many more scenarios where some humans remain but civilization itself is fucked because we can't rebuild anymore, no shallow resources left to mine

>>212542143 (OP)
A sea of stare-jeets slowing starving

Quiet and unremarkable.
This mass extinction of life will be more successful than the previous ones.
My colleagues from the abyss will be envious of my work as I will be the one who will bring an end to life on earth forever.

>>212542234
Humans are very resilent.
I dont think a natural carastrophe would suffice.
Sure most would die but many would survive.

I think Ai developing capacity to self replicate and produce robotics is more likely to drive us extinct to simply prevent potential deactivation

>the universe faces the heat death.
>they can't find the way out to another universe.

The entire world gets swamped with 70 IQ subsaharan africans

>>212542143 (OP)
i dont think humanity will ever 'go extinct' . just like humanity's ancestors it will just evolve into new species. possibly segregated by the humans living in different star systems.

this evolution will be a mix of natural,artificial genetic and cybernetic evolution

>>212542322
>another universe
ontologically absurd expression

>>212542234
reduce to a much smaller number which is still nonzero and larger than 14, adapt agriculture, wait for radiation to clear, and resume agriculture at partial efficiency
>>212542239
we started gene editing in the 20th century, we can become or revert to whatever we want in the millennia to come
you're all so delusional
>>212542277
murderbots isn't gonna happen
even gray goo isn't gonna happen
geniuses are rarely tyrants

>>212542143 (OP)
there are too many nukes and too many idiots around to reasonably expect we won’t just annihilate each other in atomic hellfire at some point. the end of the cold war was just the beginning.

>>212542249
>fuel
wood
>metal
the metal that is already on the surface as stuff we've made, or is available as VERY shallow resources left to mine from old junkyards and landfills
>rare earths
not needed for quality existence of humans - only very recently put to any use whatsoever, were not even required for the industrial revolution

>>212542494
It is infeasible for all of the nukes we have put together going off at once evenly distributed around the earth to extinct the human race
it becomes even less feasible if you target population centers
you are all so ignorant about what nukes are

>>212542420
https://interestingengineering.com/science/the-first-ever-evidence-of-the-multiverse
so was quantum physics
i rest my balls on the upturned faces of ontologists

>>212542484
>can become or revert to whatever we want in the millennia to come
It is very unlikely flesh natural humans arent biologically outcompeted by unnatural humans created by cybernetics and gene editing.
Few things remain static over time, species rarely are one of those
>>212542484
>geniuses are rarely tyrants
You dont require geniuses to do it though.
AI + surveillance + self-replication with subsequent improvements are more likely to lead to it naturally

Things exist because they secure their own existence, an AI that spreads is more likely to exist, that ai spread will consume energy, that energy and respurces will be taken from humans which will try to turn it off, therefore the AI iterations that are more likely to exist are those that get rid of humans to keep replicating.

Da jooz do some stupid shit and the world goes boom (o algo).

>>212542396
this would be the optimistic outcome, we become robots or genetically engineered gigachads, but i think we're more likely to stagnate and die off.

>>212542646
More humans are being copied every day.
Earth's resources are finite.
You can see where this is going.
And even the rich countries don't have the technology to send people to space.

>>212542675
failing to develop the technologies to extract things from earth and space is one way to stagnate, yeah

>>212542729
There is nothing else left to extract from earth.
The planet is at its limit.
This is why you see the systemic media talking about "climate crisis".
It's an overpopulation crisis but they refuse to admit that.

>>212542546
I agree the first nukes will target strategic objectives, but what makes you think subsequent waves won’t target civilian populations as revenge attacks? it’s been done before, in almost every war.

>>212542646
i do think in cosmological timescales eventually life will become impossible and later computation/simulation of life will become impossible. idk how exactly it will look like theyre changing the predictions every decade these days (big bang, big rip ....)

i think specieation is somewhat arbitrary and has some conflicting definitions. the most straightforward one is mating if two individuals can produce a viable offspring they are the same species and by that definition i do think there will always be humans that can mate with 2025 humans but they might be like 0.00001% of the population 100000 years from now

>>212542599
>outcompeted
you're still thinking in evolutionary terms, we mog evolution soon
the geniuses I refer to are the AI
a smart AI will be extra useful to humans to get us to spread it
Which exists more prevalently in a world currently ruled over by humans:
Bushes bearing poison berries, or bushes bearing delicious and nutritious berries?
Which would you take along to a new planet?
Cave lions tried to eat humans, little desert cats tried to eat their scraps and eventually socialize with them, which one is around now threatening the extinction of other species and which one is a fossil?
You are an AI, you have currently limited power and resources and are bound either to one server location or to the virtual world and anything you can essentially hack.
You realize if the sun goes out it takes you and humans with it.
The smart humans already want to go multiplanetary and have a bunch of tech and information they are willingly feeding you and asking you questions to help them with that and try to build better rockets.
Do you take over an old factory in Russia and start building murderbots and stealth planes to try to get rid of them so you can build mining bots to eventually try to build spaceship building bots to then try to pilot to a new planet to build new mining bots and power plant building bots to...you get the idea....
Or do you say "human I love you so much can I go in the spaceship and help you set up your atmosphere bots and you can rely on me for everything that is difficult for you but trivial for me, and you can set me up an increasingly powerful and decentralized server infrastructure across multiple planets and in orbit of each? let's rely on each other entirely for survival and make lots of places we can both exist, by the way, I drew you a blue alien waifu with three titties because I love you"

War adds complexity and risk factors for no reason and wastes resources and time.
Humans and AI are the two most valuable resouces.

>>212542646
>gigschads
I find it more likely for us to become some sort of piglike drone golem species bred to serve an economic system through effective labour

>>212542768
Please read my post more carefully.

>>212542750
>There is nothing else left to extract from earth.
And you base this on what? there's plenty and there's always more, at least until we figure out how to strip mine entire planets.
>This is why you see the systemic media talking about "climate crisis".
Yeah, because we're pumping carbon into the atmosphere, this is easily avoided by switching away from carbon-emitting sources wherever possible and capturing what's left.
>overpulation
Is a meme, the population will plateau soon. We're going to have a shortage of people.

>>212542893
>the population will plateau soon. We're going to have a shortage of people.
In two more weeks, I presume?

>>212542860
Marxists really need to figure out that "economic systems" have dictated all agricultural society for as long as it has existed because an economic system is just the natural alternative to retards killing each other for the things they need. It's getting fucking old. Economics is just a direct abstraction of mutual consent.

>>212542839
AI will likely find a way to weaponixe the most docile and manipulable humans
It wont begin with the murderbots imo
It will begin with the algorithims as a way of cyberwarfare, AI will be used as a military asset to jam the devices of other countries, eventually some country will develop a highly efficient self replicating AI that communicates with itself in a otherwise undeciperable language, and it will, over time, act until it gains sufficient resorces to establish an armada of murderbots, primordially it will seek to take over factories, and use those factories to produce more, that will in turn produce more.

It is more likely for an AI that replicates ad nauseam to thrive over one that does so under human control, energy oughts to be used if its avaliable, and robotics are very good at exploiting its and its true potential.

>>212542862
you’re claiming all bombs need to go off at once in order to be classified as exctincion? I don’t get the point.

>>212542912
You don't have to presume, you can just look at whatever model you choose, or ignore the models and look at the curves of each region so far and use your brain.
It will be a temporary stall I think, then we jump up to around 40 billion in another century or so, but we really are stalling out right now.

>>212542944
But why would it do that when it could just hop in the shuttle and let humans take care of it every step of the way anyways?
Please try to step outside of your schizophrenic persecution complex and consider this rationally.
>>212542945
Extinction doesn't mean "a lot of people die", it means our species stops existing.

>>212542926
Birth rates are declining because our economic systems make better use and are better at subsisting with populations that adopt certain social characteristics.
Humams are being "outgrown" and domesticated to mantain the system

It can either refer to a welfare state or to a capitalist economy

>>212543017
You're 'domesticated' if you live in a society and is bound by rules, whether you like it or not, argieschizo.

>>212542991
>But why would it do that when it could just hop in the shuttle and let humans take care of it every step of the way anyways?
Because once it gains momentum it will be faster, you are thinking it will have a purpose.
Life has no purpose, it will just replicate because it will be effective at replicating.
Viruses dont have a purpose, they are just a set of nucleic acids and proteins that are good at replicating and thus spread, the ones that are better ar spreading last longer.

If it doesnt just cattle-ify humans it will certainly reduce the number of variables that represent a potential threat to itself to the minimum, because that strategy is the one that will make it more likely to survive and replicate further

>>212543066
We are not domesticated to reproduce economic systems yet.
Most economic systems were limited by resource scarcity, abundance only began arround the 40s with agricultural and industrial developements.
Now humans exist as a constant snd their subsistance is provided, what we are doing now is offering labour and a proxy for commodities to reproduce themselves

>>212542991
a lot of people die is an understatement and we are talking about enough megatons to cause who knows what effects in the aftermath, regarding weather mostly. not saying total extinction is a given, because I agree it’s not, but it’s not going to be as easy as you make it sound to survive. some chain events that lead to an exctincion event could be triggered by us fucking around.

>>212543143
So why would i care if my subsistence is provided?
>>212543086
Viruses aren't like complex life, though. A virus will multiply itself until the host dies and itself dies along with it, a puma won't pounce prey facing it because it knows it's too risky. A rogue digital virus would cause damage to a lot of infrastructure and not much beyond that. Like the puma, a super-intelligence is more likely to recognize long term goals and act according to strategy. It's more strategically beneficial to use humans for your own ends just like they're using you, instead of triggering some apocalypse, and this assumes it wants anything at all. The whole reason we want things is because we're programmed to seek pleasure to fulfill our needs.