<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<div class="css-ov1ktg"><br>
</div>
<div id="root">
<div class="css-wp58sy">
<div class="css-fmnleb">
<div class="css-ov1ktg">
<div width="718" class="css-1jllois">
<header class="css-d92687">
<h1 class="css-19v093x">How Humanity Came To Contemplate
Its Possible Extinction: A Timeline</h1>
<div class="css-1x1jxeu">
<div class="css-7kp13n">By</div>
<div class="css-7ol5x1"><span class="css-1q5ec3n">Thomas
Moynihan</span></div>
<div class="css-8rl9b7">thereader.mitpress.mit.edu</div>
<div class="css-zskk6u">13 min</div>
</div>
<div class="css-1890bmp"><span class="css-1neb7j1">View
Original</span></div>
</header>
<div class="css-429vn2">
<div role="main" class="css-yt2q7e">
<div id="RIL_container">
<div id="RIL_body">
<div id="RIL_less">
<div lang="en">
<div>It is only in the last couple of
centuries that we have begun to grasp that
our existence might one day cease to exist
forever.</div>
<figure>
<div class="RIL_IMG" id="RIL_IMG_1">
<figure> <img
src="https://pocket-image-cache.com//filters:no_upscale()/https%3A%2F%2Fthereader.mitpress.mit.edu%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2020%2F09%2Fnew-lede-3-extinction-700x420.jpg"
alt=""> </figure>
</div>
<figcaption>Today's attempts to measure and
mitigate existential threats are the
continuation of a project initiated over
two centuries ago. Image: MIT Press Reader</figcaption></figure>
<p>With Covid-19 afflicting the world, and a
climate crisis looming, humanity’s future
seems uncertain. While the novel coronavirus
does not itself pose a threat to the
continuation of the species, it has
undoubtedly stirred anxiety in many of us
and has even sparked discussion about human
extinction. Less and less does the end of
the species seem an area of lurid fantasy or
remote speculation.</p>
<p>Indeed, the opening decades of the 21<sup>st</sup>
century have seen investigation into
so-called ‘existential risks’ establish
itself as a growing field of rigorous
scientific inquiry. Whether designer
pathogen or malicious AI, we now recognize
many ways to die.</p>
<p>But when did people first start <em>actually
thinking</em> about human extinction?</p>
<div class="RIL_IMG" id="RIL_IMG_2">
<figure> <img
src="https://pocket-image-cache.com//filters:no_upscale()/https%3A%2F%2Fthereader.mitpress.mit.edu%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2020%2F09%2Fnew-cover-x-risk.jpg"
alt=""> </figure>
</div>
<p>The answer is: surprisingly recently. As
ideas go, the idea of the extinction of the
human species is a new one. It did not, and
could not, exist until a few centuries ago.</p>
<p>Of course, we humans have probably been
prophesying the end of the world since we
began talking and telling stories. However,
the modern idea of human extinction
distinguishes itself from the tradition of
apocalypse as it is found across cultures
and throughout history.</p>
<p>In the ancient mythologies you will not
find the idea of a physical universe
continuing, in its independent vastness, <em>after</em>
the annihilation of humans. Neither will you
find the idea of the end of the world as a
totally meaningless event. It is invariably
imbued with some moral significance or
revelatory lesson. Meaning and value lives
on in a spiritual afterlife, in
anthropomorphic gods, or an eventual rebirth
of creation.</p>
<blockquote> </blockquote>
<p>Only very recently in human history did
people realize that <em>Homo sapiens</em>,
and everything it finds meaningful, might
permanently disappear. Only recently did
people realize the physical universe could
continue — aimlessly — without us. However,
this was one of the most important
discoveries humans have ever made. It is
perhaps one of our crowning achievements.
Why? Because we can only become truly
responsible for ourselves when we fully
realize what is at stake. And, in realizing
that the entire fate of human value within
the physical universe may rest upon us, we
could finally begin to face up to what is at
stake in our actions and decisions upon this
planet. This is a discovery that humanity is
still learning the lessons of — no matter
how fallibly and falteringly.</p>
<p>Such a momentous understanding only came
after centuries of laborious inquiry within
science and philosophy. The timeline below
revisits some of the most important
milestones in this great, and ongoing,
drama.</p>
<hr>
<p><strong>c.75,000 BP</strong>: Toba
supervolcanic eruption rocks the planet.
Some evidence implies <em>Homo sapiens</em>
nearly goes extinct (though scientists
disagree on the details). Around the same
time, advanced human behavior and language
emerge: This kickstarts cumulative culture,
as recipes for technology begin to
accumulate across generations. An immense
journey begins…</p>
<h4>PHASE 1 (PREHISTORY–1600): INDESTRUCTIBLE
VALUE</h4>
<p><em>No clear distinction between ethics and
physics, so no true threat to the
existence of ethics in the physical
universe. Indestructibility of value. No
ability to think of a possible world
without minds.</em></p>
<p><strong>c.400 BC:</strong> Even though they
talk of great catastrophes and destroyed
worlds, ancient philosophers all believe
that nature does not leave eternally wasted
opportunities where things, or values, could
be but never are again. Whatever is lost in
nature will eventually return in time —
indestructibility of species, humanity, and
value.</p>
<p><strong>c.360 BC:</strong> Plato speaks of
cataclysms wiping away prior humanities, but
this is only part of eternal cycling return.
Permanent extinction is unthinkable.</p>
<p><strong>c.350 BC</strong>: Aristotle claims
that everything valuable and useful has
already been discovered. Everything knowable
and useful can be found in the ‘wisdom of
the ages.’ Precludes thinking on perils and
risks that have not previously been
recorded. Material conditions of mankind
cannot radically change, or fail.</p>
<p><strong>c.50 BC</strong>: Lucretius speaks
of humankind ‘perishing,’ but also asserts
that nothing is ever truly destroyed in
nature, and that time eventually replenishes
all losses. Our world may die, but it will
eventually be remade.</p>
<div>
<figure>
<div class="RIL_IMG" id="RIL_IMG_3">
<figure> <img
src="https://pocket-image-cache.com//filters:no_upscale()/https%3A%2F%2Fthereader.mitpress.mit.edu%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2020%2F09%2Fal-ghazali.jpg"
alt=""> </figure>
</div>
<figcaption>Around 1100, Persian
theologian Abu Hamid Al-Ghazâlî
developed ways of talking about
possibilities in terms of logical
coherence rather than prior experience.</figcaption></figure>
</div>
<p><strong>c.1100</strong> <strong>AD</strong>:
Persian theologian Al-Ghazâlî develops ways
of talking about possibilities in terms of
their logical coherence rather than
availability to prior experience — crucial
to all later thinking on risks previously
never experienced.</p>
<p><strong>c.1200</strong>: Hindu-Arabic
numeral system introduced to Europe, later
allowing computation of large timespans that
will be instrumental in discovery of the
depth (rather than eternity) of past and
future time.</p>
<p><strong>c.1300</strong>: Islamic and
Christian philosophers invent logical
possibility as a way of thinking about the
ways God could have created the world
differently than it actually is. Theologians
like William of Ockham conduct first thought
experiments on a possible world without any
human minds. Still, God would never manifest
such a world, they believe.</p>
<p><strong>1350</strong>: Black death kills up
to 200 million people in Europe and North
Africa. Around 60 percent of Europe’s
population perishes.</p>
<p><strong>1564</strong>: Using new logical
conceptions of possibility, Gerolamo Cardano
inaugurates the science of probability by
thinking of each dice throw as the
expression of a wider, abstract space of
possibilities.</p>
<figure>
<div class="RIL_IMG" id="RIL_IMG_4">
<figure> <img
src="https://pocket-image-cache.com//filters:no_upscale()/https%3A%2F%2Fthereader.mitpress.mit.edu%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2020%2F09%2Fplurality-of-worlds.jpg"
alt=""> </figure>
</div>
<figcaption>Bernard le Bovier de Fontenelle.
Front piece for “Conversations on the
Plurality of Worlds,” 1686.</figcaption></figure>
<hr>
<h4>PHASE 2 (1600–1800): COSMIC NONCHALANCE</h4>
<p><em>Modern physics implies that ours is one
planet among many, but it is generally
presumed that the universe is habitable
and filled with humanoids. For every
populated planet destroyed, another grows.
Species cannot die. Indestructibility of
value continues. Inability to recognize
existential stakes.</em></p>
<p><strong>1600s</strong>: Copernican
Revolution gains momentum. Growing
acceptance, following supernova sightings,
that planets and suns can be destroyed. But
from stars to species, nothing can be lost:
It will regrow again elsewhere.</p>
<p><strong>1680s</strong>: Breaking with
orthodoxy, Robert Hooke and Edmond Halley
controversially endorse the idea of
prehistoric extinctions caused by massive
geological cataclysms. Such conjectures
remain fringe, however.</p>
<p><strong>1705:</strong> Following Leibniz
and Newton’s invention of calculus,
long-term prediction of nature becomes
feasible. Halley predicts the return of his
comet.</p>
<p><strong>172</strong>1: Population science
takes hold: People start thinking of <em>Homo
sapiens</em> as a global aggregate. Baron
de Montesquieu writes of humanity expiring
due to infertility.</p>
<p><strong>1740s</strong>: Reports of behemoth
fossil remains found in Siberia and America
begin to interest, and confuse, naturalists.
Could these be extinct beasts?</p>
<p><strong>1750s</strong>: Speculations on
human extinction, as a naturalistic
possibility, begin to emerge. Yet many
remain confident that humans would simply
re-evolve on Earth.</p>
<p><strong>1755</strong>: Lisbon Earthquake
shocks Europe. Influential geologist Georges
Buffon accepts prehistoric species
extinctions, ponders on which animals will
inherit the Earth after we are gone.</p>
<p><strong>1758:</strong> Linnaeus adds genus
<em>Homo</em> to his taxonomy. Halley’s
comet returns, confirming his prediction.</p>
<div class="RIL_IMG" id="RIL_IMG_5">
<figure> <img
src="https://pocket-image-cache.com//filters:no_upscale()/https%3A%2F%2Fthereader.mitpress.mit.edu%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2020%2F09%2Flalande.jpg"
alt=""> </figure>
</div>
<p><strong>1763</strong>: Thomas Bayes’s
revolutionary work on probability is
published, providing rules for thinking
about probabilities of events prior to any
trials. Proves essential to later thinking
on risks beyond precedent.</p>
<p><strong>1770s</strong>: First declarations
that <em>Homo sapiens</em> may be specific
and unique to the Earth, and thus contingent
upon the planet’s particular conditions.
Baron d’Holbach writes that, if Earth were
destroyed, our species would irreversibly
disappear with it.</p>
<p><strong>1773</strong>: Probability theory
applied to issues of global catastrophic
risk: Joseph Lalande computes likelihood of
Earth being hit by a comet intersecting our
orbit.</p>
<p><strong>1778</strong>: Georges Buffon
provides first experimental calculations of
the window of planetary habitability, argues
that eventually Earth will become
irreversibly uninhabitable.</p>
<p><strong>1781</strong>: Enlightenment
philosophy culminates in Kant’s critique of
the way we bias and distort our objective
theories with our moral prejudices. We may <em>like</em>
the idea that the amount of value is
constant in the universe, and that valuable
things cannot irreversibly be destroyed, but
that doesn’t mean it is <em>true</em>.</p>
<figure>
<div class="RIL_IMG" id="RIL_IMG_6">
<figure> <img
src="https://pocket-image-cache.com//filters:no_upscale()/https%3A%2F%2Fthereader.mitpress.mit.edu%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2020%2F09%2Fbiela-comet-700x328.jpg"
alt=""> </figure>
</div>
<figcaption>In the 1830s, Biela’s comet (the
third short-period comet discovered after
Halley’s and Encke’s) became an object of
concern when it was realized that its
orbit intersected with Earth’s. Image:
Wikimedia Commons</figcaption></figure>
<p><strong>1790s</strong>: Deep time and
prehistoric extinctions accepted as
scientific consensus. Modern paleontology
and geology are born. They unveil a
radically nonhuman past. Georges Cuvier
theorizes our planet has been wracked by
many catastrophes throughout its past,
wiping out scores of creatures.</p>
<p><strong>1796</strong>: First notions of
long-term human potential — to alter
material conditions and alleviate suffering
— begin to come together in the work of
(e.g.) Condorcet. Meanwhile, Marquis de Sade
becomes the first proponent of voluntary
human extinction. Pierre-Simon Laplace says
that the probability of a cometary collision
is low but will ‘accumulate’ over long
periods of time. He remains confident that
civilization would re-emerge and be
replayed, however.</p>
<p><strong>1800:</strong> By the century’s
close, George Cuvier has identified 23
extinct prehistoric species.</p>
<figure>
<div class="RIL_IMG" id="RIL_IMG_7">
<figure> <img
src="https://pocket-image-cache.com//filters:no_upscale()/https%3A%2F%2Fthereader.mitpress.mit.edu%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2020%2F09%2Ffossil-700x505.jpg"
alt=""> </figure>
</div>
<figcaption>The first anatomically
reconstructed depiction of an prehistoric
fossil skeleton (a megatherium),
accomplished by Jean Bautista Bru in 1793.
Image from Annales du Muséum national
d’histoire naturelle (1804), Biodiversity
Heritage Library.</figcaption></figure>
<hr>
<h4>PHASE 3 (1800–1950): COSMIC LONELINESS</h4>
<p><em>Growing recognition that the entire
universe may not be maximally habitable
nor inhabited. Cosmic default is hostility
to life and value. Many accept human
extinction as irreversible and plausible —
but not yet a pressing probability.</em></p>
<p><strong>1805</strong>: Jean-Baptiste
François Xavier Cousin De Grainville writes
first fiction on “The Last Man.” He then
kills himself.</p>
<p><strong>1810s</strong>: Human extinction
first becomes a topic in popular culture and
popular fiction. People start more clearly
regarding it as a moral tragedy. Value
begins to seem insecure in the universe, not
indestructible.</p>
<p><strong>1812:</strong> Scientists claim the
Mars-Jupiter asteroid belt is the ruins of a
shattered planet. Joseph-Louis Lagrange
attempts to precisely compute the exact
explosive force required.</p>
<p><strong>1815</strong>: Eruption of Mount
Tambora causes famine in China and Europe
and triggers cholera outbreak in Bengal.
Volcanic dust in the atmosphere nearly blots
out the sun; the perturbation provokes
visions of biosphere collapse.</p>
<p><strong>1826</strong>: Mary Shelley’s “The
Last Man,” depicting humanity perishing due
to a global pandemic. First proper depiction
of an existential catastrophe where nonhuman
ecosystems continue after demise of
humanity: Our end is not the end of the
world.</p>
<figure>
<div class="RIL_IMG" id="RIL_IMG_8">
<figure> <img
src="https://pocket-image-cache.com//filters:no_upscale()/https%3A%2F%2Fthereader.mitpress.mit.edu%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2020%2F09%2Fempty-700x483.jpg"
alt=""> </figure>
</div>
<figcaption>With increases in telescopic
power, people soon faced up to the
terrifying magnitude—and emptiness–of
space. Image: A drawing of the Whirlpool
Galaxy, by Lord Rosse, mid-19th century.</figcaption></figure>
<p><strong>1830s:</strong> Proposing
catastrophes as explanations in astrophysics
and geophysics falls into disrepute, the
argument that the cosmos is a stable and
steady system wins the day, this obstructs
inquiry into large-scale cataclysms for over
a century.</p>
<p><strong>1844</strong>: Reacting to Thomas
Malthus’s theories of overpopulation, Prince
Vladimir Odoevsky provides first speculation
on omnicide (i.e. human extinction caused by
human action). He imagines our species
explosively committing suicide after
resource exhaustion and population explosion
cause civilization’s collapse. Odoevsky also
provides first visions of human economy
going off-world in order to stave off such
outcomes.</p>
<p><strong>c.1850:</strong> Large reflecting
telescopes reveal deep space as mostly empty
and utterly alien. Artistic depictions of
Earth from space begin to evince a sense of
cosmic loneliness.</p>
<p><strong>1859</strong>: Darwin’s “The Origin
of Species” published. Progressivist
tendencies in early evolutionary theory fuel
confidence in human adaptiveness and
inexorable improvement. Fears of extinction
are eclipsed by fears of degeneration.</p>
<figure>
<div class="RIL_IMG" id="RIL_IMG_9">
<figure> <img
src="https://pocket-image-cache.com//filters:no_upscale()/https%3A%2F%2Fthereader.mitpress.mit.edu%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2020%2F09%2Fsized-Kupka-La-Chapelle-ILN-1909-700x520.jpg"
alt=""> </figure>
</div>
<figcaption>Reconstruction of the La
Chapelle-aux-Saints Neanderthal by the
Czech artist Frantizek Kupka. Published in
The Illustrated London News, February 27,
1909</figcaption></figure>
<p><strong>1863:</strong> William King
hypothesizes that fossil remains found in
Neander valley represent an extinct species
of the genus Homo. The ‘Neanderthal man’
becomes first extinct hominin species to be
recognized.</p>
<p><strong>1865</strong>: Rudolf Clausius
names ‘entropy’ and theorizes the universe’s
heat death. Despite provoking gloomy visions
from writers like Henry Adams and Oswald
Spengler, it seems far off enough to not be
pressing.</p>
<div class="RIL_IMG" id="RIL_IMG_10">
<figure> <img
src="https://pocket-image-cache.com//filters:no_upscale()/https%3A%2F%2Fthereader.mitpress.mit.edu%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2020%2F09%2Fcommon-task-700x567.png"
alt=""> </figure>
</div>
<p><strong>1890s</strong>: Russian Cosmism
launched with the first writings of Fedorov
and Tsiolkovsky, making clear the stakes of
extinction: They both realize that the only
route to long-term survival is leaving
Earth. First calls to escape X-risk by
securing humanity’s foothold in the wider
cosmos.</p>
<p><strong>1895</strong>: Tsiolkovsky provides
first vision of a Dyson sphere: a
sun-girdling sphere that allows full
harnessing of solar energy. Suggests
mega-scale restructuring of the Solar System
in order to further secure human
civilization and ensure its long-term
future.</p>
<p><strong>1918</strong>: Great War provokes
many intellectuals (including Winston
Churchill) to ponder omnicide, but still a
remote possibility. Physicists begin to
realize how stringent and rare the
conditions of habitability may be. Yet
belief in humanoids inevitably re-evolving
remains high.</p>
<p><strong>c.1930</strong>: J.B.S. Haldane and
J.D. Bernal provide first coherent synthesis
of ideas regarding long-term potential,
existential risk, space colonization,
astroengineering, transhumanism,
bioenhancement, and civilizational pitfalls.
Haldane notes that if civilization
collapses, yet humanity survives, there is
no guarantee advanced civilization would
re-evolve.</p>
<p><strong>1937</strong>: Olaf Stapledon
further synthesizes these ideas into a
comparative study of omnicide in his
awe-inspiring “Star Maker.”</p>
<div class="RIL_IMG" id="RIL_IMG_11">
<figure> <img
src="https://pocket-image-cache.com//filters:no_upscale()/https%3A%2F%2Fthereader.mitpress.mit.edu%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2020%2F09%2FWW1-700x544.jpg"
alt=""> </figure>
</div>
<hr>
<h4>PHASE 4 (~1950–PRESENT): ASTRONOMICAL
VALUE</h4>
<p><em>Nuclear weapons, for the first time,
make extinction a policy issue. It shifts
from speculative possibility to pressing
plausibility. Anthropogenic risks come to
fore. Birth of internet gives critical
mass to previously disparate communities.
Finally, a rigorous framework for thinking
analytically about X-risk is developed
around the millennium.</em></p>
<p><strong>1942:</strong> Edward Teller fears
that a nuclear fission bomb could plausibly
ignite the atmosphere of the Earth and
destroy all life. Development of the bomb
goes ahead regardless, even though
scientists later concluded more research was
needed to ascertain that this
biosphere-annihilating event would
definitely not occur.</p>
<p><strong>1945</strong>: Hiroshima and
Nagasaki. Atom bomb changes how we relate to
intelligence’s place in the cosmos. Faith in
inevitable progress takes a battering.
Rather than recurrent and omniprevalent
owing to its adaptiveness, technological
intelligence comes to be considered as
potentially rare and even maladaptive.</p>
<div>
<figure>
<div class="RIL_IMG" id="RIL_IMG_12">
<figure> <img
src="https://pocket-image-cache.com//filters:no_upscale()/https%3A%2F%2Fthereader.mitpress.mit.edu%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2020%2F09%2F1950hiroshimausacover.jpeg"
alt=""> </figure>
</div>
<figcaption>“Hiroshima, U.S.A.: Can
Anything be Done About It?” A 1950 cover
of Collier’s magazine, with a painting
by artist and astronomer Chesley
Bonestell.</figcaption></figure>
</div>
<p><strong>1950</strong>: Leó Szilárd suggests
the feasibility of a planet-killing ‘cobalt
bomb.’ Enrico Fermi articulates the most
significant riddle of modern science, the
Fermi Paradox. Catastrophism begins to
reassert itself, with scientists asking
whether supernovas caused past mass
extinctions.</p>
<p><strong>1950s</strong>: The modern field of
AI research begins in earnest.</p>
<p><strong>1960s</strong>: Initial SETI
projects return only ominous silence.
Biologists begin to insist that humanoids
would not necessarily evolve on other
planets. Dolphin research suggests
alternative models of intelligence.
Technological civilization appears
increasingly contingent, heightening the
perceived severity of X-risk.</p>
<p><strong>1962</strong>: Rachel Carson’s book
“Silent Spring” raises the alarm on climate
catastrophe.</p>
<p><strong>1965</strong>: I.J. Good speculates
that an AI could recursively improve itself
and thus trigger a runaway ‘intelligence
explosion,’ leaving us far behind. It will
be our ‘last invention,’ he muses.</p>
<p><strong>Late 1960s</strong>: Fears of
overpopulation reassert themselves in
neo-Malthusianism. Growing discussion that
space colonization is the only long-term
guarantee for human flourishing and
survival. In line with this, scientists like
Freeman Dyson propose largescale
astroengineering as a method to further
entrench and fortify the foothold of
intelligence within the universe.</p>
<p><strong>1969</strong>: First crewed mission
lands on the moon.</p>
<div class="RIL_IMG" id="RIL_IMG_13">
<figure> <img
src="https://pocket-image-cache.com//filters:no_upscale()/https%3A%2F%2Fthereader.mitpress.mit.edu%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2020%2F09%2Fend-of-the-world.jpg"
alt=""> </figure>
</div>
<p><strong>1973</strong>: Brandon Carter
articulates the Anthropic Principle. Goes on
to derive the Doomsday Argument from it,
which uses Bayesian probability to estimate
how many generations of humans are likely to
yet be born.</p>
<p><strong>1980s:</strong> Bayesian methods
vindicated in statistics. Luis and Walter
Alvarez report findings that lead to
consensus that an asteroid or comet killed
the dinosaurs. Through this, catastrophism
is vindicated: astronomical disasters <em>can</em>
significantly affect (and threaten)
terrestrial life.</p>
<p><strong>1982:</strong> Jonathan Schell pens
“The Fate of the Earth,” stressing nuclear
threat and the moral significance of the
foreclosure of humanity’s entire future.</p>
<p><strong>1984</strong>: Derek Parfit
publishes “Reasons and Persons.” Population
ethics clarifies the unique moral severity
of total human extinction.</p>
<p><strong>1986</strong>: A year after a hole
in the ozone layer is discovered in
Antarctica, Eric Drexler publishes “Engines
of Creation,” hinting to X-risks from
nanotech.</p>
<p><strong>1989</strong>: Stephen Jay Gould
publishes “Wonderful Life,” insisting that
humanoid intelligence is not the inevitable
result of evolution. In his “Imperative of
Responsibility,” Hans Jonas demands a ‘new
ethics of responsibility for the distant
future.’</p>
<p><strong>1990s</strong>: NASA tasked with
tracking threats from asteroids and
near-Earth objects. Internet allows
convergence of disparate communities
concerned about transhumanism, extropianism,
longtermism, etc.</p>
<p><strong>1996</strong>: John Leslie
publishes “The End of the World: The Science
and Ethics of Human Extinction.” Landmark
text meticulously studying Carter’s Doomsday
Argument.</p>
<p><strong>2000:</strong> Marvin Minsky
suggests that an AI tasked with solving the
Riemann Hypothesis might unwittingly
exterminate humanity by converting us, and
all available matter in the Solar System,
into ‘computronium’ so that it has the
resources for the task.</p>
<p><strong>2002</strong>: Nick Bostrom
introduces the term ‘existential risk.’</p>
<p><strong>2010s</strong>: Deep learning takes
off, triggering another boom in AI research
and development.</p>
<p><strong>2012</strong>: Researchers engineer
artificial strains of H5N1 virus that are
both highly lethal and highly virulent.</p>
<p><strong>2013:</strong> CRISPR-Cas9 first
utilized for genome editing.</p>
<p><strong>2018</strong>: IPCC special report
on the catastrophic impact of global warming
of 1.5ºC published.</p>
<p><strong>2020:</strong> Toby Ord publishes
“The Precipice.” Covid-19 pandemic sweeps
the globe, demonstrating systemic weakness
and unpreparedness for global risks.</p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div class="css-10y0cgg">
<div width="718" class="css-ijvbcu"><br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>