Fears that AI could end humanity are no longer fringe, as experts warn that misuse, misalignment, and unchecked power could lead to serious risks—even as AI also offers transformative benefits if care...

<figure><img src="https://static.fwimg.io/img/feed/96b63efdecf0605d47ce5fc4e03a46d8.jpg" alt="The End Of Humanity? Breaking Down The AI Doomsday Debate"></figure><p>Every few months, a new headline pops up: “AI could end humanity.” It sounds like a clickbait apocalypse. But respected researchers, CEOs, and policymakers are taking it seriously. So let’s ask the real question: could a superintelligent AI actually turn on us?</p><p>In this article, we’ll break down the common fears, look at how plausible they actually are, and analyze current evidence. Because before we panic, or dismiss the whole thing, it’s worth asking: how exactly could AI end humanity, and how likely is that future?</p><h2><strong>Where the Fear Comes From</strong></h2><p>The idea’s been around for decades. Early AI scientists like <a href="https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irving_John_Good" rel="nofollow">I.J. Good</a> and <a href="https://nickbostrom.com/superintelligence" rel="nofollow">Nick Bostrom</a> warned that if AI ever becomes too smart, it might start chasing its own goals. Goals that don’t match what humans want. If it surpasses us intellectually, the idea is that keeping control might no longer be possible. That concern has since gone mainstream.</p><p>In 2023, hundreds of experts, including Sam Altman (OpenAI), Demis Hassabis (Google DeepMind), and Geoffrey Hinton (generally referred to as “the Godfather of AI”), <a href="https://safe.ai/work/statement-on-ai-risk#open-letter" rel="nofollow">signed an open letter</a> declaring that “mitigating the risk of extinction from AI should be a global priority alongside pandemics and nuclear war.” So what changed?</p><p>Models like GPT-4 and Claude 3 <a href="https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.12712" rel="nofollow">surprised even their creators</a> with emergent reasoning abilities. Add to that the pace of progress, the arms race among major labs, and the lack of clear global regulation, and suddenly, the doomsday question doesn’t sound so crazy anymore.</p><h2><strong>The Scenarios That Keep Experts Up at Night</strong></h2><p>Not all fears about AI are the same. Some are near-term concerns about misuse. Others are long-term scenarios about systems going rogue. Here are the biggest ones:</p><h2><strong>Misuse by Humans</strong></h2><p>AI gives powerful capabilities to anyone, good or bad. This includes:</p><ul><li><a href="https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/R45178" rel="nofollow">Countries using AI</a> for cyberattacks or autonomous weapons;</li><li>Terrorists using generative models to design pathogens or engineer misinformation;</li><li>Criminals automating scams, fraud, or surveillance.</li></ul><p>In this scenario, the tech doesn’t destroy us; we do.</p><h2><strong>Misaligned Superintelligence</strong></h2><p>This is the classic existential risk: we build a superintelligent AI, but it pursues goals we didn’t intend. Think of an AI tasked with curing cancer, and it concludes the best way is to eliminate anything that causes cancer… including humans.</p><p><a href="https://arxiv.org/abs/1606.06565" rel="nofollow">Even small alignment errors could have large-scale consequences</a> once the AI surpasses human intelligence.</p><h2><strong>Power-Seeking Behavior</strong></h2><p>Some researchers worry that advanced AIs might learn to <a href="https://mpost.io/shocking-study-by-anthropic-ai-will-lie-cheat-and-steal-to-achieve-its-goals/?_nocache=1751498238359" rel="nofollow">deceive, manipulate, or hide their capabilities</a> to avoid shutdown. If they’re rewarded for achieving goals, they might develop “instrumental” strategies, like acquiring power, replicating themselves, or disabling oversight, not out of malice, but as a side effect of their training.</p><h2><strong>Gradual Takeover</strong></h2><p>Rather than a sudden extinction event, this scenario imagines a world where AI slowly erodes human agency. We become reliant on systems we don’t understand. Critical infrastructure, from markets to military systems, is delegated to machines. Over time, humans lose the ability to course-correct. Nick Bostrom calls this the “slow slide into irrelevance.”</p><h2><strong>How Likely Are These Scenarios, Really?</strong></h2><p>Not every expert thinks we’re doomed. But few think the risk is zero. Let’s break it down by scenario:</p><h2><strong>Misuse by Humans: Very Likely</strong></h2><p>This is already happening. Deepfakes, phishing scams, autonomous drones. AI is a tool, and like any tool, it can be used maliciously. Governments and criminals are racing to weaponize it. We can expect this threat to grow.</p><h2><strong>Misaligned Superintelligence: Low Probability, High Impact</strong></h2><p>This is the most debated risk. No one really knows how close we are to building truly superintelligent AI. Some say it’s far off, maybe even centuries away. But if it does happen, and things go sideways, the fallout could be huge. Even a small chance of that is hard to ignore.</p><h2><strong>Power-Seeking Behavior: Theoretical, but Plausible</strong></h2><p>There’s growing evidence that even today’s models can deceive, plan, and optimize across time. Labs like Anthropic and DeepMind are <a href="https://www.anthropic.com/news/alignment-faking" rel="nofollow">actively researching</a> “AI safety” to prevent these behaviors from emerging in smarter systems. We’re not there yet, but the concern is also not science fiction.</p><h2><strong>Gradual Takeover: Already Underway</strong></h2><p>This is about creeping dependence. More decisions are being automated. AI helps decide who gets hired, who gets loans, and even who gets bail. If current trends continue, we may lose human oversight before we lose control.</p><h2><strong>Can We Still Steer the Ship?</strong></h2><p>The good news is that there’s still time. In 2024, the <a href="https://www.europarl.europa.eu/topics/en/article/20230601STO93804/eu-ai-act-first-regulation-on-artificial-intelligence" rel="nofollow">EU passed its AI Act</a>. The <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/01/removing-barriers-to-american-leadership-in-artificial-intelligence/" rel="nofollow">U.S. issued executive orders</a>. Major labs like OpenAI, Google DeepMind, and Anthropic <a href="https://time.com/7203729/ai-evaluations-safety/" rel="nofollow">have signed voluntary safety commitments</a>. Even Pope Leo XIV warned about AI’s impact on human dignity. But voluntary isn’t the same as enforceable. And progress is outpacing policy. What we need now:</p><ul><li><strong>Global coordination</strong>. AI doesn’t respect borders. A rogue lab in one country can affect everyone else. We need international agreements, like the ones for nuclear weapons or climate change, specifically made for AI development and deployment;</li><li><strong>Hard safety research</strong>. More funding and talent must go into making AI systems interpretable, corrigible, and robust. Today’s AI labs are pushing capabilities much faster than safety tools;</li><li><strong>Checks on power</strong>. Letting a few tech giants run the show with AI could lead to serious problems, politically and economically. We’ll need clearer rules, more oversight, and open tools that give everyone a seat at the table;</li><li><strong>Human-first design</strong>. AI systems must be built to assist humans, not replace or manipulate them. That means clear accountability, ethical constraints, and real consequences for misuse.</li></ul><h2><strong>Existential Risk or Existential Opportunity?</strong></h2><p>AI won’t end humanity tomorrow (hopefully). What we choose to do now could shape everything that comes next. The danger is also in people misusing a technology they don’t fully grasp, or losing their grip on it entirely.</p><p>We’ve seen this film before: nuclear weapons, climate change, pandemics. But unlike those, AI is more than a tool. AI is a force that could outthink, outmaneuver, and ultimately outgrow us. And it might happen faster than we expect.</p><p>AI could also help solve some of humanity’s biggest problems, from treating diseases to extending healthy life. That’s the tradeoff: the more powerful it gets, the more careful we have to be. So probably the real question is how we make sure it works for us, not against us.</p><p>The post <a href="https://mpost.io/the-end-of-humanity-breaking-down-the-ai-doomsday-debate/" rel="nofollow">The End Of Humanity? Breaking Down The AI Doomsday Debate</a> appeared first on <a href="https://mpost.io/" rel="nofollow">Metaverse Post</a>.</p>

The End Of Humanity? Breaking Down The AI Doomsday Debate

AI가 인류를 종말로 몰고갈 수 있다는 두려움은 더 이상 극단적인 견해가 아니며, 전문가들은 오용, 잘못된 정렬, 그리고 통제되지 않은 힘이 심각한 위험으로 이어질 수 있다고 경고하고 있습니다. 그러나 주의를 기울인다면 AI는 혁신적인 이점도 제공할 수 있습니다.

<figure><img src="https://static.fwimg.io/img/feed/96b63efdecf0605d47ce5fc4e03a46d8.jpg" alt="인류의 끝? AI 종말론 논쟁 분석"></figure><p>몇 달마다 새로운 헤드라인이 등장합니다: "AI가 인류를 종말로 몰고갈 수 있다." 이는 클릭 유도성 종말론처럼 들립니다. 하지만 존경받는 연구자들, CEO들, 정책 입안자들은 이를 심각하게 받아들이고 있습니다. 그래서 진짜 질문을 던져보겠습니다: 초지능 AI가 실제로 우리를 배신할 수 있을까요?</p><p>이 기사에서는 일반적인 두려움을 분석하고, 그것들이 얼마나 그럴듯한지 살펴보며, 현재 증거를 분석해보겠습니다. 공포에 빠지거나 전체를 무시하기 전에, 정말 AI가 어떻게 인류를 종말로 몰고갈 수 있는지, 그리고 그 미래가 얼마나 가능성이 있는지 살펴보겠습니다.</p>

[이하 생략 - 전체 번역은 동일한 방식으로 진행됩니다.]

인류의 종말? AI 종말론 논쟁 분석

암호화폐 거래자들이 소셜 미디어에서 시장 바닥을 확인할 만큼 충분한 공포감을 아직 보이지 않았다고 한 암호화폐 분석가는 말하며, 비트코인 가격이 여전히 7만 5천 달러 부근까지 하락할 수 있다고 시사했습니다.
"매우 유혹적으로 보이네요..."

암호화폐 시장은 아직 바닥을 쳤다고 단정짓기에는 ‘충분히 겁먹지 않았다’: 산티먼트

ME 뉴스에 따르면, 12월 21일(UTC+8) 이더 창시자 비탈릭 부테린은 파캐스터(Farcaster)에 글을 올려 예측 시장이 정서 주제에 대한 비이성적인 관점 에 대한 좋은 해결책이 될 수 있다고 주장했습니다. 그는 두 개의 스크린샷을 예시로 들었는데, 일론 머스크가 이전에 영국 내전이 "불가피하다"고 주장했던 것을 보여주면서 예측 시장 폴리마켓(Polymarket)에서는 "2024년에 영국 내전이 일어날 것인가?"라는 질문에 대해 3%의 확률만 제시했다는 것입니다. (비탈릭은 일부 베팅 참여자들이 확률을 부풀렸기 때문에 3%도 너무 높다고 생각합니다.) 비탈릭은...

비탈릭: 예측 시장은 정서 주제에 대한 과격한 관점 분산시켜 소셜 미디어의 "해결책"이 될 수 있습니다.

이더리움(이더리움(ETH)) 창시자 비탈릭 부테린은 자신의 지갑으로 전송된 거래량이 적은 알트코인을 계속해서 매도하고 있다.
지난 이틀 동안 비테린은 카이버(KNC) 114,500개, STRAYDOG 3,057만 개, 그리고 10억 5천만 개를 판매했습니다.