# Human extinction



## autisticdragonkin (Jul 13, 2016)

I have heard many people here saying that humans are going to go extinct in the next few centuries. I see no reason why to think that this will occur and I think that such fatalism is unproductive and may very well create a self fulfilling prophecy if a large portion of the population starts to believe it. Some people will question whether humanity deserves to live or not and my response is that they should think about how cruel it is to starve a small child, multiply that by over a billion and you get human extinction, as well as questioning whether there even needs to be a justification for human survival in the first place as justification is a human concept that may not apply to the existence of humanity itself


----------



## Joan Nyan (Jul 13, 2016)

autisticdragonkin said:


> they should think about how cruel it is to starve a small child


I thought you didn't have empathy.


----------



## Online Violence (Jul 13, 2016)

Neo-malthusian nihilists are contained entirely in western first world countries. Don't worry, humanity will endure, just not the regressive portion of it glorifying Darwin Awards as a moral imperative.


----------



## Pepsi-Cola (Jul 13, 2016)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_extinction
Check out a few of the links on this article.

Not even counting all of the numerous hypotheticals such as Nuclear annihilation and planetary impact, Global Warming and the Holocene Extinction will wipe us out in the next 200-300 years. It's pessimistic and depressing to think, but we're living on the precipice of pretty much all life on Earth.

But, instead of being all mopey about it, imo we should be happy. We have the honor of being the very last of what our species has to offer. We have the privilege of being able to look back on all of humanity's achievements and failures, in a way, we're almost able to get a complete retrospective on our species as a whole.


----------



## autisticdragonkin (Jul 13, 2016)

Jon-Kacho said:


> I thought you didn't have empathy.


I am quite empathetic I just use other justifications alongside empathy, in this case arguing that there is not a need for a justification. Empathy is overrated by normal people but underrated by philosophers


Pepsi said:


> But, instead of being all mopey about it, imo we should be happy. We have the honor of being the very last of what our species has to offer. We have the privilege of being able to look back on all of humanity's achievements and failures, in a way, we're almost able to get a complete retrospective on our species as a whole.


This is exactly the type of nihilism that will create the self fulfilling prophecy. Just sitting around in a happy haze will be the end of us, instead we need to fight to the last man against those threats, we cannot let ourselves go gentle into the good night


----------



## Pepsi-Cola (Jul 13, 2016)

autisticdragonkin said:


> This is exactly the type of nihilism that will create the self fulfilling prophecy. Just sitting around in a happy haze will be the end of us, instead we need to fight to the last man against those threats, we cannot let ourselves go gentle into the good night


While I agree that we should try to prevent human extinction, I think that overpopulation, general inactivity and unwillingness to prevent said issues complicates things.

Either way, the extreme changes we'd have to make to prevent global warming at this point just aren't doable. By the time we successfully transition to alternative fuels, our time would be up, so to speak.


----------



## Ebola (Jul 13, 2016)

Humans will not exist at all in a thousand years, but that doesn't mean we're all gonna be dead; one likely outcome is converting all matter we encounter into small computers and uploading our minds into them. Even if everyone died right now, there'd still be an infinite number of parallel Earths where everyone's fine, so it's pointless to worry about. The only problem we have now is making it to the technological singularity without setting ourselves backwards hundreds of thousands of years by starting WW3 or not being able to stop a pandemic.


----------



## Online Violence (Jul 13, 2016)

Again, don't worry, this sort of apathetic, narcissistic nihilism is very restricted. Thousands of generations of human ancestors doing their best to pass on their line is a deeply imbedded instinct that is replicated in most of their descendents. Those who promote this bleak view of the future tend to be or turn themselves into genetic dead ends in any case, so it's a self-correcting problem.


----------



## Tranquil Beetle (Jul 13, 2016)

Pepsi said:


> While I agree that we should try to prevent human extinction, I think that overpopulation, general inactivity and unwillingness to prevent said issues complicates things.
> 
> Either way, the extreme changes we'd have to make to prevent global warming at this point just aren't doable. By the time we successfully transition to alternative fuels, our time would be up, so to speak.


It took about 10,000 years of continuous shit luck to finally put our neanderthal cousins down; humans are remarkably resilient and adaptable.


----------



## Pepsi-Cola (Jul 13, 2016)

Tranquil Beetle said:


> It took about 10,000 years of continuous shit luck to finally put our neanderthal cousins down; humans are remarkably resilient and adaptable.


You can't really adapt to literally smothering heat tbh. However, I do see what you're saying and it is a valid point.


----------



## Ebola (Jul 13, 2016)

Naysayers should be genocided.


----------



## Joan Nyan (Jul 13, 2016)

autisticdragonkin said:


> I am quite empathetic I just use other justifications alongside empathy, in this case arguing that there is not a need for a justification. Empathy is overrated by normal people but underrated by philosophers


Sorry I keep forgetting that your autism was cured.


Pepsi said:


> You can't really adapt to literally smothering heat tbh. However, I do see what you're saying and it is a valid point.


Even if climate science wasn't all a hoax, temperatures raising a couple degrees in 100 years isn't "literally smothering heat" tbh fam.


----------



## Ebola (Jul 13, 2016)

Jeez, don't deny climate change; it will be responsible for plenty of new shitskin-killing pandemics and disasters. 
IMO it would be really hard to kill every human on Earth unless a gamma-ray burst hit the planet.


----------



## Pepsi-Cola (Jul 13, 2016)

Jon-Kacho said:


> Even if climate science wasn't all a hoax, temperatures raising a couple degrees in 100 years isn't "literally smothering heat" tbh fam.


tbh fam it sort of is when you factor in heating oceans releasing C2o into the atmosphere at alarming rates.

I'm just paraphrasing Stephen hawking tho, that guys a massive cuckold tbh.


----------



## Ebola (Jul 13, 2016)

I think what autsiticdragonkin is saying about beliefs of people changing things is true, morose than any fedora atheist would ever admit. For example, let's say some retard says pants are a cause of cancer. It may seem stupid at first, but there will totally be at least a small group of nutcases that will believe it. Not all of these people will be dumb; there are plenty of geniuses who are insane, and these people will do all the heavy pushing. Eventually, this small group will start spreading its message through means like the internet and various forms of media and it will begin to grow. Groups of people will begin to get concerned, and there will be studies done, and I am sure at least some of them will have results that can be twisted and manipulated into supporting that pants cause cancer. With enough pushing, at some point, some people will be so paranoid about it all, that pants literally will begin causing cancer, enhancing the correlation, and creating a self-fulfilling feedback loop, resulting in a world where pretty much everyone believes pants cause cancer, because at that point they will. In a nutshell, this is memetic magic in action.


----------



## DatBepisTho (Jul 13, 2016)

Ebola said:


> Jeez, don't deny climate change; it will be responsible for plenty of new shitskin-killing pandemics and disasters.
> IMO it would be really hard to kill every human on Earth unless a gamma-ray burst hit the planet.


If the rapidly-declining conditions of our ecosystems causing natural disasters and disease doesn't get us, I'm betting on the much-feared scenario of Cold War America:
Enemy nukes and mutually assured destruction.

(Then again I'm a Fallout and Alas Babylon sperg so yeah, ofcourse that'd be how I imagine everything ending in a series of radioactive flashes.)


----------



## KingGeedorah (Jul 14, 2016)

A giant fucking meteor will blast our asses back to an ice age.


----------



## Pikimon (Jul 14, 2016)

We probably won't go extinct. We're like cockroaches and dandelions.

edit: fuk u fallensaint u slut


----------



## AlephOne2Many (Jul 14, 2016)

Viruses are getting more and more advanced. So... That's quintessential food for thought.


----------



## AnOminous (Jul 14, 2016)

NumberingYourState said:


> Viruses are getting more and more advanced. So... That's quintessential food for thought.



Pretty unlikely, though.  We have enough random garbage DNA and variation, including DNA we horked from previous viruses, that it's pretty likely some group of people somewhere will be immune to it because whatever DNA it hooks onto is broken in them somehow.

Unless it's specifically designed to finish us, I suppose.


----------



## Lorento (Jul 14, 2016)

Frankly, even if the viruses happen, even if sea levels rise, even if events on a near cataclysmic scale occur, I think that humanity will live on. We are the greatest and most advanced life form Earth has ever produced, creating things this part of our galaxy has never before seen. 

Our numbers will be reduced if the sea levels start to rise, but we will survive, just as we have before.

Unless a giant meteorite hits us. Then we're fucked.


----------



## autisticdragonkin (Jul 14, 2016)

We lived for 100,000 years without a justification why do we need one now


----------



## Ebola (Jul 14, 2016)

The cause of human extinction will not be a virus, but viruses do provide the best entertainment and panic; also, they are good at removing the least desirable from the planet. Viruses, in general, evolve to become less deadly as time passes, so that they can become one with the host. In 500 years from now, it's possible every human will have HIV, but instead of hurting people, it might make us live longer and enhance our immune systems. Viruses that cause harm to people are the minority of the minority; nearly all viruses do nothing to people, or benefit people by enhancing them. In fact, viruses are the true source of evolution and biological diversity, and life would not exist without them because the cell nucleus in every cell of complex life, including humans, is an authentic virus. 

 END VIROPHOBIA NOW.


----------



## CWCchange (Jul 15, 2016)

I think humanity should be more concerned with other species threatened with extinction, not from a hippie standpoint but rather because their absence in the ecosystem can negatively affect out livelihoods. A textbook example is bees, which have given us civilized agriculture. Conversely, what were once the most bio-diverse places in the world liked Sub-Saharan Africa, have completely fucked themselves. When European powers left, everything to better utilize the environment was abused by the savage populace who poach animals left and right. People are starving, and the only reason they're not extinct is because how many children they have to negate it.


----------



## Vex Overmind (Jul 16, 2016)

Humans are more of a threat to themselves than any calamity known to the universe. We can survive a meteor impact, but I highly doubt we can survive a nuclear war.


----------



## Marvin (Jul 16, 2016)

Vex Overmind said:


> Humans are more of a threat to themselves than any calamity known to the universe. We can survive a meteor impact, but I highly doubt we can survive a nuclear war.


The nuclear war extinction theories are based on questionable data and theories.

I don't think a nuclear war would come close to extinguishing humanity. Hell, I don't think it'd extinguish the dumber mammals on the planet, let alone an intelligent species like humans.


----------



## AnOminous (Jul 16, 2016)

Marvin said:


> The nuclear war extinction theories are based on questionable data and theories.
> 
> I don't think a nuclear war would come close to extinguishing humanity. Hell, I don't think it'd extinguish the dumber mammals on the planet, let alone an intelligent species like humans.



Who cares?  Being one of the 10% or so would still suck shit and probably be worse than getting killed.


----------



## Marvin (Jul 16, 2016)

AnOminous said:


> Who cares?  Being one of the 10% or so would still suck shit and probably be worse than getting killed.


Oh certainly. But I think people approach the topic from an apocalyptic perspective, and I think the distinction is important.


----------



## AnOminous (Jul 17, 2016)

Marvin said:


> Oh certainly. But I think people approach the topic from an apocalyptic perspective, and I think the distinction is important.



I think it's an apocalypse from any reasonable standpoint.  So some ragged apelike creatures might still be around, and some tiny fraction of the scum who started the whole thing get their nice cozy bunkers to cool their heels in.  There will still be nothing resembling civilization in any human lifetime.


----------



## Marvin (Jul 17, 2016)

AnOminous said:


> I think it's an apocalypse from any reasonable standpoint.  So some ragged apelike creatures might still be around, and some tiny fraction of the scum who started the whole thing get their nice cozy bunkers to cool their heels in.  There will still be nothing resembling civilization in any human lifetime.


Civilization is like 90% technology. I think if a solid 5% of humans, with access to technology, survive, humanity will rebuild. Easily.


----------



## AnOminous (Jul 17, 2016)

Marvin said:


> Civilization is like 90% technology. I think if a solid 5% of humans, with access to technology, survive, humanity will rebuild. Easily.



Most of the technology we currently have requires a lot of social infrastructure just to operate.  You don't just recreate that out of thin air.  And a lot of our more modern knowledge is in proprietary formats that deteriorate rapidly and, again, to build something to read it you'd need a lot of infrastructure.  You can't just magic up PCB fabrication facilities out of thin air whatever you know.


----------



## Marvin (Jul 17, 2016)

AnOminous said:


> Most of the technology we currently have requires a lot of social infrastructure just to operate.  You don't just recreate that out of thin air.  And a lot of our more modern knowledge is in proprietary formats that deteriorate rapidly and, again, to build something to read it you'd need a lot of infrastructure.  You can't just magic up PCB fabrication facilities out of thin air whatever you know.


Most of the cost of developing those technologies is research. Information doesn't vanish out of thin air.


----------



## AnOminous (Jul 17, 2016)

Marvin said:


> Most of the cost of developing those technologies is research. Information doesn't vanish out of thin air.



Information != expertise.  When everyone expert in interpreting that information is gone, it's as good as useless.  And quite possibly outright inaccessible as a result of being in an inappropriate medium.  It's not like just flipping a switch back on.


----------



## Marvin (Jul 17, 2016)

AnOminous said:


> Information != expertise.  When everyone expert in interpreting that information is gone, it's as good as useless.  And quite possibly outright inaccessible as a result of being in an inappropriate medium.  It's not like just flipping a switch back on.


Disagree.

What might've taken 500 years to develop would take 100 years to recreate, tops, if the development was documented.


----------



## AnOminous (Jul 17, 2016)

Marvin said:


> Disagree.
> 
> What might've taken 500 years to develop would take 100 years to recreate, tops, if the development was documented.



Who cares about 100 years?  Nobody alive would be alive to see it.


----------



## Marvin (Jul 17, 2016)

AnOminous said:


> Who cares about 100 years?  Nobody alive would be alive to see it.


That's an important distinction between human extinction and merely a large human catastrophe.


----------



## Male Idiot (Jul 17, 2016)

Humans are very resourceful and adaptive like cockroaches.

Short of something wiping all life from Earth, such as a Hot Quazar beam-ray, Aliens! or some future superweapon, I don't see humans becoming extinct.

Now, there are lots of causes that could put human civilisation back, or wipe out huge swathes of it. But I think enough will always survive to keep the species going, until either due to time or genetical engineering humanity will cease to exist because it evolves into a higher life form, just as the cavemen who came before us became us.


----------



## fcgh vgcf (Jul 19, 2016)

888
i'm under the belief that we humans are like cockroaches and mice: we'll probably not die out by 'banal' causes like viruses and diseases, natural disasters and apocalyptic meteor strikes. we're too smart to really die from natural causes anymore. a mass war a la atomic fallout would probably fuck the lot of us over real good but it's not like we can't just hide beneath the earth for several hundreds or thousands of years and survive that way. we're at the brink of a new intersolar space-race and this time it's to claim either mars or the moon i'd wager so space exploration isn't out of the question just yet.
''but what will happen to earth in the future?'' same as what happened after the latest ice age ended ya dingus. we'd have mass ecological turbulence with new ecosystems being set in place and older ones dying out. at most i'd wager that a warmer climate is going to occur and we'd enter a new pleistocene era with massive mammals once more (think mammoths and giant sloths n shit) or some other 'big' family of animals which are adapted to a warmer climate would take over.


----------



## Strelok (Jul 19, 2016)

The only "realistic" extinction level even you could really come up with, would be if you believe the conspiracy theories that aliens are set to glass the earth if we ever leave the solar system, out of fear of our species warlike tendancies, ala Dan Akryod. Even a mass event like a meteor strike or nuclear holocaust (And a lot of the data people cite on nuclear holocausts is from thr 60s and infact overblown compared to modern estimates on the level of destruction and especially contamination that would result) we would still have enough survivors that a new, albeit more primitive, civilization would emerge. So short of some other species coming here and fucking us up, or the sun skipping several stages and going kaboom, we'd likely, as a species at least, survive. The main difference between us and other species is our ability to teach each other, and that goes miles twords suitability as a whole.


----------



## Male Idiot (Jul 19, 2016)

Strelok said:


> The only "realistic" extinction level even you could really come up with, would be if you believe the conspiracy theories that aliens are set to glass the earth if we ever leave the solar system, out of fear of our species warlike tendancies, ala Dan Akryod. Even a mass event like a meteor strike or nuclear holocaust (And a lot of the data on nuclear holocausts is infact overblown) we would still have enough survivors that a new, albeit more primitive, civilization would emerge. So short of some other species coming here and fucking us up, or the sun skipping several stages and going kaboom, we'd likely, as a species at least, survive. The main difference between us and other species is our ability to teach each other, and that goes miles twords suitability as a whole.



There are certain things like Quasar beams or migrating black holes and such that could theoretically wipe all life from Earth, but the chances of that happening in the next 4 billion years are very low.

As for Aliens... I think there are 2 possible scenarios.

A- Superpowered aliens
B- Aliens just a little more advanced than us.

In case A, I really doubt they would need to resort to killing us all to contain us. Think about South park, and how they simply put a forcefield around Earth. 
I imagine these aliens are so advanced, even if we got into space we would not be a threat to them and they would ignore us if we did not move actively against them.
The only thing I can see these aliens doing is a low key observation of Earth for scientific and or entertainment reasons.

In case B, I imagine we would face an alien race 2-3 centuries ahead of us. However I doubt most of these aliens would be fanatical cannibal killers. I can rather imagine them exploiting and/or enslaving humans.

We also do not know if there is any sort of galactic community out there. It is possible that an advanced alien power would try to discourage lesser ones from wiping each other out.

Though all in all, I am not sure FTL is even possible, and that alien life is rife. The most likely scenario is that aliens are too far and wide in space and time to come to us.
And if they can't do FTL, they would need massive colony ships which would have trouble faring against an entire planet's resources. You also can't easily make intersteller empires without FTL.


----------



## Octopuff in kumquat (Jun 17, 2017)

Ebola said:


> Humans will not exist at all in a thousand years, but that doesn't mean we're all gonna be dead; one likely outcome is converting all matter we encounter into small computers and uploading our minds into them. Even if everyone died right now, there'd still be an infinite number of parallel Earths where everyone's fine, so it's pointless to worry about. The only problem we have now is making it to the technological singularity without setting ourselves backwards hundreds of thousands of years by starting WW3 or not being able to stop a pandemic.



Even if parallel dimensions did exist, they would still be wholly irrelevant to US here, and thus the point of this question. The fact this is how you answered the questions blows my mind.

Anyway, for me, I prefer the optimistic approach. I feel there's always a way to overcome barriers and prevent true catastrophes. However, bar none, the first thing that needs to happen is for humanity to learn some modesty and mature a little. Adapting new and better technologies, limiting our population growth, and most of all, quit fucking bickering over the most inane shit with one another and work together.


----------



## John Titor (Jun 17, 2017)

IMO, the human race has been through a lot of shit that nearly wiped us out (see Toba event). I think we'll persist somehow.


----------



## Alec Benson Leary (Jun 17, 2017)

I can't find it right now but someone on my fb friends list posted some sanctimonious article about "is it worth it to even have children now that Trump is in office and the Earth's biosphere will be destroyed?"

I commented that it wasn't any more "worth it" to have children 50 years ago when the reds were a c-hair from dropping nukes on our heads either, and that anyone who thinks life is too tough is free to give up whenever they want. Then I didn't bother checking back because on facebook I never receive responses to any of my radical ideas.


----------



## Cripple (Jun 17, 2017)

Alec Benson Leary said:


> I can't find it right now but someone on my fb friends list posted some sanctimonious article about "is it worth it to even have children now that Trump is in office and the Earth's biosphere will be destroyed?"
> 
> I commented that it wasn't any more "worth it" to have children 50 years ago when the reds were a c-hair from dropping nukes on our heads either, and that anyone who thinks life is too tough is free to give up whenever they want. Then I didn't bother checking back because on facebook I never receive responses to any of my radical ideas.



Are people aware at most a president can be in office us eight years? And our grandparents were born during the Great Depression. Talk about a time to not have kids! People were selling/abandoning kids in droves at the time! (My grandfather included.)

And um, yeah, the topic at hand. I guess I do think humans will eventually become extinct, but not anytime soon. Not until the population is cut down at least and that won't be for like a hundred years after we achieve economic equity for all nations. And that won't be any time soon.


----------



## Gym Leader Elesa (Jun 17, 2017)

Cripple said:


> Not until the population is cut down at least and that won't be for like a hundred years after we achieve economic equity for all nations. And that won't be any time soon.



In fact, it's impossible.

Anyway, I think we have another few thousand years.


----------



## teh forist speret (Jun 17, 2017)

Octopuff in kumquat said:


> Even if parallel dimensions did exist, they would still be wholly irrelevant to US here, and thus the point of this question. The fact this is how you answered the questions blows my mind.
> 
> Anyway, for me, I prefer the optimistic approach. I feel there's always a way to overcome barriers and prevent true catastrophes. However, bar none, the first thing that needs to happen is for humanity to learn some modesty and mature a little. Adapting new and better technologies, limiting our population growth, and most of all, quit fucking bickering over the most inane shit with one another and work together.


How about you stop being an autistic fuck?


----------



## cuddle striker (Jun 18, 2017)

can we just nuke Mars already? I don't care if it means humans spread like a plague throughout the galaxy.


----------



## Male Idiot (Jun 18, 2017)

resonancer said:


> can we just nuke Mars already? I don't care if it means humans spread like a plague throughout the galaxy.



Not a good idea!


----------



## bbpoison (Jul 5, 2017)

autisticdragonkin said:


> I have heard many people here saying that humans are going to go extinct in the next few centuries. I see no reason why to think that this will occur and I think that such fatalism is unproductive and may very well create a self fulfilling prophecy if a large portion of the population starts to believe it. Some people will question whether humanity deserves to live or not and my response is that they should think about how cruel it is to starve a small child, multiply that by over a billion and you get human extinction, as well as questioning whether there even needs to be a justification for human survival in the first place as justification is a human concept that may not apply to the existence of humanity itself



I do not believe humanity will go extinct. I believe we are close to reaching the next stage of consciousness via technology (ex. the internet) I do not believe fatalism is unproductive. I like fatalism from the perspective of the individual. Since the individual is both at the same time a facet and the whole thing (everything/existence) Fatalism can be a healthy way in exploring the shadow of nothingness and even if it's not "healthy" the individual  can be said to not be under control. While I like the idea of raising awareness I can also accept the idea of the whole civilization disappearing. And even if all consciousness of all forms of existence and non-existence were to cease in any observable or non-observable functions it would be okay because apparently "this"seems to always function and even if we left time and space What I'm saying is, everything is functioning "perfectly" no matter what thought or action you decide to take. Because it's all you and therefore any actions that are possible and impossible are already you.


----------



## TwinkleSnort (Jul 5, 2017)




----------



## Tragi-Chan (Jul 5, 2017)

Humans are an incredibly adaptable species, and that's why we're in charge. Short of something straight-up blowing the Earth to pieces in one shot, there's no disaster that could wipe us out completely.

What I could see happening is some sort of crisis that greatly reduces our numbers. An antibiotic-resistant pandemic would be a possibility, although with modern medicine and communications I suspect any plague would either be contained before it could do any real damage or would have to spread so fast that it would burn itself out.

My money would be on some sort of overpopulation crisis. Populations expand beyond our ability to feed and look after them. This could lead to a lot of deaths in itself, through drought, starvation and disease. Or it could lead to a third world war.


----------



## Inquisitor_BadAss (Jul 6, 2017)

The only way humans are leaving this planet is if we pack our bags, jump on a rocket and fly to some other system. It would kinda interesting to see what would happen to the planet if we did that.


----------



## TwinkleSnort (Jul 6, 2017)

Inquisitor_BadAss said:


> The only way humans are leaving this planet is if we pack our bags, jump on a rocket and fly to some other system. It would kinda interesting to see what would happen to the planet if we did that.



I think some people tried that once. Don't know if it worked out for them, since none of them came back to comment one way or the other.


----------



## Vex Overmind (Jul 6, 2017)

Maybe we'll see something like the transhumanist postulate. Humanity will divulge into a clusterfuck of different sub-species and baseline normal Humans like us cease to exist.


That's one hell of a way to put it.


----------



## Manah (Jul 8, 2017)

Really, a mass extinction of humanity is probably the best thing for the human race, like a forest fire.


----------



## BadaBadaBoom (Jul 8, 2017)

Unless the planet becomes completely uninhabitable for a number of species, I doubt there would be any specific human based extinction. We are at the top of the food chain and have a huge number of resources to counter any global epidemic or disaster that could happen. There's bound to be survivors in any major catastrophe and those people will be the one's who will repopulate the Earth.

What will be interesting to see is exactly to what length human beings will go to be able to survive if an actual disastrous epidemic happens. How much will science and biology be allowed to intervene if people start becoming drastic? Will we see an actual war of ideals between humans not on a racial/national level, but on a more personal, spiritual level? We're going to reach a point where medical science is going to intrude on extremely hard held beliefs people have about life and death as a necessity for survival. I think as we go on some of the final conflicts between humans will ultimately be between those who want to survive at all costs and those who stalwartly hang onto human rights and decency above even their own lives.

I guess what I'm getting at is North Korea is gonna make bio weapons of its citizens at some point and you better be on the right side of history when one of Kim Jong's undying golems comes knocking on your door.


----------



## Mysterious Capitalist (Jul 21, 2017)

I like to think it will go down somewhat similarly to Asimov's "The Last Question", which is also probably my favorite story of his.

The only thing that may be different is that we'll probably discover ways to upload our brains in computers way before we discover how to travel in space efficiently (it'd make sense at that point to travel inefficiently, but with immortal computer consciences, so it'll be fine)

Who knows? Maybe at some point in or computer brain lives we'll even learn to harness another's species equivalent of little girls' emotional trauma to invert entropy!


----------

