[us-merul]

"Humans will do what they’ve always tried to do—gain power, enslave, kill, control, exploit, cheat, or just be lazy and avoid the hard work—but now with new abilities that we couldn’t have dreamed of." -- A pretty bleak, and also accurate, observation of humanity. I have to hope that the alternative sentence encompassing all of the good can lead to some balance.

[Flamingoat]

No, it is not accurate at all. There are some people that do all of these sure, however the vast majority of people live pretty ordinary lives where they do very little of what is described.

I actually think it is very intellectually lazy to be this cynical.

[ViktorRay]

I think it is partially true. The vast majority of human beings don’t act like that. But it seems the ones in power or close proximity to power do.

This is why it is important to have societies where various forms of power are managed carefully. Limited constitutional government with guaranteed freedoms and checks and balances for example. Regulations placed on mega corporations is another example. Restrictions to prevent the powerful in government or business (or both!) from messing around with the rest of us…

[adornKey]

I don't think there's much secret evil out there. I've taken a look at some people that were officially in power for something - they were nice handsome people - sometimes a bit stupid. I think the biggest problem is stupidity. Stupid people in power will do powerful stupid things - while they think that they're doing something great. The more intelligent ones can change their minds quickly if you feed them with good arguments - but that's not easy, because they often live in a bubble and are out of reach.

[rurp]

It's absolutely true, but most of the destruction is abstracted away so modern humans don't have to experience it directly or even really think about it. A staggering number of creatures are killed by normal people driving to normal things every year. Many more are killed by all of the resource extraction needed to supply our normal lives. Not to mention the vast numbers of wildlife that sees their habitat destroyed every year to make way for more housing and other development.

Killing animals for fun is an entire sport enjoyed by millions. Humans keep pets that kill billions of birds every year. The limited areas we've set aside to mostly let other nature be nature are constantly under threat and being shrunk down. The list of ways we completely subjugate other intelligent life on this planet is endless. We have driven many hundreds of species to extinction and kill countless billions every year.

I certainly enjoy the gains our species have made, just like everyone else on HN. I'd rather be in our position than any other species on our planet. But given our history I'm also pretty terrified of what happens if and when we run into a smarter and more powerful alien species or AI. If history is any guide, it won't go well for us.

This understanding can guide practical decisions. We shouldn't be barreling towards a potential super intelligence with no safeguards given how catastrophic that outcome could be, just like we shouldn't be shooting messages into space trying to wave our arms at whatever might be out there, any more than a small creature in the forest would want to attract the attention of a strange human.

[Flamingoat]

Sorry but we weren't talking about Animal Welfare arguments. It was clearly in the scope of how people treat each other. Philosophical discussions similar to Janist/Vegan style argument are like well outside of the scope that being discussed.

As for hunting. I don't see anything wrong with hunting. I don't see anything wrong with eating meat.

As someone that has lived the vast majority of their life in the countryside, I also have little time for animal welfare arguments of the sort you are making.

> But given our history I'm also pretty terrified of what happens if and when we run into a smarter and more powerful alien species or AI. If history is any guide, it won't go well for us.

This is all sci-fiction nonsense. If we had any sort of aliens contact they wouldn't be many of them, or it would most likely be a probe like we send out probes to other planets. As for the super intelligence, the AI has an off switch.

[cdirkx]

The problem is that technology exponentially increases the negative effects of bad actors. The worst a sociopath could do in the stone age was ruin his local community; while today there are many more dystopian alternatives.

[Flamingoat]

I don't think that is true either. There have been despots throughout all of human history that have killed huge amounts of people with technology that is considered primitive now.

Whereas much of the technology we have today has a massive positive benefit. Simply access to information today is amazing, I have learned how to fix my own vehicles, bicycles and do house repairs from simply YouTube.

As I said being cynical is being intellectually lazy because it allows you to focus on the negatives and dismiss the positives.

[adornKey]

I don't think it's that accurate. Evil people are rare - and lazy people usually don't cause problems. The most real damage comes from human stupidity - from the mass of people that just want to help and do something good. Stupid People blindly believe anything they're told. And they do a lot of really bad things not because they're evil and lazy, but because they want to help achieve even the most stupid goal. Usually even nasty propagandists leaders aren't that evil - often they're just an intellectual failure - or have some mental issues. Themselves they don't do much practical evil - the mob of nice stupid people does the dirty work, because they just want to help.

[tasuki]

> Stupid People blindly believe anything they're told.

Then tell them all the right things!

[adornKey]

Problem is that this is a full time job... You can tell them anything, but they'll forget...

[wmeredith]

I really liked this article, but it is pessimistic. Unfortunately that seems to be the culture-du-jour. Anger and fear drive engagement effectively, as it always has. If it bleeds, it Leeds has been a thing in news organizations since at least the 70s.

If we ignore the headlines peddled by those who stand to benefit the most from inflaming and inciting, we live in a miraculous modern age largely devoid of much of the suffering previous generations were forced to endure. Make no mistake there are problems, but they are growing exponentially fewer by the day.

An alternate take: humans will do what they’ve always tried to do—build, empower, engineer, cure, optimize, create, or just collaborate with other humans for the benefit of their immediate community—but now with new abilities that we couldn’t have dreamed of.

[pixl97]

I mean, any article that doesn't include both is incomplete.

>If it bleeds, it Leeds has been a thing in news organizations since at least the 70s.

The term yellow journalism is far older.

[mannanj]

this is accurate because of the few who do it. however the cautionary and hopeful tale behind it is the majority when they stand up against it can change the distribution of power. today however we're comfortable and soft and too scared to do - so posts like this remind us to gain some courage to stand up for change.