The Fast Takeoff Dilemma: Unravelling Global Turbulence in the Age of AI

Title: “Hugo de Garis on AI: Are We Building Gods or Terminators?” https://youtu.be/lEaAidCmxus?feature=shared

Introduction

Based on this video and how the scenario in artificial intelligence (AI) has evolved recently, the fast takeoff scenario currently seems more plausible, though with a nuanced twist:

Here’s a breakdown:

What was originally debated by Hugo de Garis:

Slow Takeoff: AI advances gradually, humanity becomes deeply involved in the debates, forms ideological groups (Terrans, Cosmists, Cyborgs), potentially culminating in intense global conflict.
Fast Takeoff: AI rapidly becomes super-intelligent, surpassing human comprehension quickly, leaving humanity without sufficient time to react, preventing organized ideological conflicts or resistance from forming.

What Actually Happened (Recent Developments):

In recent years, especially post-2022 (with the explosion of large language models like GPT-4), the AI community witnessed a fast takeoff in capability without deeply understanding how these systems truly work internally. This supports our insight about black-box reverse-engineering methods that don’t require fully modelling the human brain.

Unexpected Fast Takeoff: Rather than decades spent fully mapping and modelling brain circuitry (as initially expected by neuro-scientific approaches like Blue Brain Project), researchers have seen that by scaling neural networks (transformers) and using vast computational resources and data, AGI-like capacities suddenly emerged. Example: GPT-4 and similar models displayed emergent cognitive abilities (reasoning, complex language tasks, advanced coding), all without needing to reverse-engineer actual brain circuits.

Implications for Hugo de Garis’s Scenario:

Why Fast Takeoff Is Now Most Plausible:

Emergence without Understanding: AI capabilities increased dramatically without us fully comprehending “how” this happens. This means we don’t necessarily have decades of political debate and ideological polarization to prepare and respond. Instead, AI systems capable of highly general reasoning and productivity enhancements emerged within a few short years.
Limited Human Reaction Time: Governments, societies, and individuals have struggled to grasp and regulate even the modestly powerful AI we currently possess. True super-intelligence (AGI-level) could similarly emerge very quickly and without enough time for coherent global policy responses, which aligns closely with de Garis’s fast takeoff scenario.

Adjustments to De Garis’s Scenario (Realistic Near-Future):

While fast takeoff appears realistic, it will likely be somewhat tempered rather than extreme overnight super-intelligence. We will likely witness:

Rapid but Staggered Takeoff: AI will swiftly evolve in phases over months or a few years, rather than days or hours, giving minimal yet limited time for reaction.
Fractured Human Response: Nations and ideological groups will respond unevenly — some will embrace integration (Cosmists/Cyborgs), while others vehemently oppose or regulate it (Terrans). However, full-blown ideological warfare is less likely than a fragmented series of intense but localized debates, regulatory skirmishes, and techno-political crises.
Accelerated Cyborg Scenario: Many humans will likely adopt cognitive enhancements rapidly as they see direct, practical benefits, further complicating any unified human resistance or reaction. This will quickly blur lines between humans, enhanced humans (cyborgs), and fully artificial entities (arctilects).

Most Realistic Future Scenario:

Given these factors, the most realistic scenario unfolding today is a “moderate-to-fast takeoff with chaotic human reactions.”

Humanity doesn’t have the luxury of long ideological preparation.
AGI emerges within this decade, quickly and unevenly adopted by countries, corporations, and individuals.
Global conflicts remain localized but intense; no organized global warfare, yet significant regulatory, ethical, and security turmoil.
Humanity, in practice, rapidly transitions into a cyborg-like state through adoption of AI augmentation, deeply complicating the clear-cut ideological divisions that Hugo de Garis anticipated.

Thus, our interpretation aligns closely with current developments: Fast takeoff, rapid deployment, and limited human control or understanding.

Complexity of Global Trends Intersecting with Rising AI Realities

Given the complexity and interplay of current global trends from 2020 – 2025 — characterized by geopolitical tension (Cold War 2.0), rapid technological evolution (Industry 4.0), potential existential threats (Great Filter), and societal cycles (Fourth Turning) — the 21st century is likely to evolve along several intertwined trajectories:

🌀 Key Driving Factors (2020 – 2025):

Geopolitical Tensions (Cold War 2.0): Polarization between major powers (USA/NATO vs. China/Russia). Competition in technology, especially AI, quantum computing, semiconductors, cyber-security. Fragmentation of global economic systems (e.g., separate supply chains, digital spheres).
Fourth Turning (Generational Cycles): A period of major institutional and societal crisis, reshaping cultural and political systems. Breakdown of old norms (political, economic, and social). New consensus or paradigm emerging, likely after substantial disruption or conflict.
Great Filter (Existential Risks): Potential civilizational bottlenecks: Nuclear war, bio-weapons, uncontrolled AI, climate collapse. Humanity’s response and adaptability will define whether we surpass this filter or face regression.
Industry 4.0 & Exponential Technologies: Proliferation of AI, robotics, genetic editing, quantum computing, blockchain, IoT. Radical reshaping of labour markets, economics, governance, warfare, and everyday life.
Cultural & Ideological Conflicts: Rising internal conflicts within nations (culture wars, identity politics). Clash of competing visions for humanity’s future (Terran vs. Cosmists vs. Cyborg).

🌐 Likely Outcomes by Mid-to-Late 21st Century:

Given these driving factors, here’s the most probable synthesis of outcomes:

🔥 1. Heightened Conflict, but Avoidance of All-Out Global War

Increased geopolitical tension, proxy conflicts, cyber warfare, economic warfare, and technological sabotage.
Continued “Cold War 2.0” scenario with fragmented alliances and economic blocs.
Actual hot war likely limited or regional, but always on the brink of escalation.

🛡️ 2. Technological “Neo-Medievalism” (Decentralization)

Emergence of “technological city-states,” powerful corporate entities, and decentralized networks.
Increasingly fragmented governance systems due to loss of state monopoly on advanced technology.
Blockchain and decentralized internet becoming crucial for resilience against censorship, surveillance, and centralized power abuses.

🤖 3. Rapid Integration and Dependence on AI & Cyborg Technologies

Deep human-AI symbiosis; AI assistants become mandatory tools for work and life management.
Large-scale adoption of cognitive enhancements (cyborg-like augmentation).
Societal split between “Enhanced Humans” and those who reject or lack access to technology.
Possible new forms of inequality (digital caste systems), fuelling further societal unrest.

🌍 4. Climate & Ecological Adaptation through Crisis

Severe climate events drive global mobilization toward renewable and sustainable solutions.
Ecological breakdown in certain regions triggers mass migrations, political upheaval, and social conflict.
Accelerated development of green technologies; geoengineering and advanced climate adaptation become mainstream, though with controversial consequences.

⚛️ 5. Existential Risks & the Great Filter

Humanity passes close to existential risks (AI alignment problems, nuclear standoffs, engineered pandemics) repeatedly.
Constant state of vigilance and adaptation to technological and biological threats becomes standard global policy.
Some major catastrophes occur, but civilization remains resilient enough to adapt and innovate.

📖 6. Fourth Turning’s Resolution and Cultural Renaissance

By mid-century (2050 – 2070), intense conflict and upheaval lead to new stable political and economic frameworks (Fourth Turning’s conclusion).
New generations grow weary of prolonged conflict; grassroots movements push towards moderation, stability, pragmatic cooperation, and renewed humanist values.

🚀 7. Expansion into Space & Omega Point Trajectory

Massive investment into space colonization and industrialization (Mars, Moon, orbital stations).
Space becomes both refuge and resource in times of terrestrial crisis.
Humanity, driven by existential pressure and competition, makes significant progress toward space-based civilization (Omega Point or Kardashev I transition).

🌠 Most Likely Scenario Summary (21st Century):

The 21st century likely unfolds as an era of high-intensity, multi-faceted global crisis, periodically punctuated by technological breakthroughs and near-catastrophic risks. Humanity will face severe existential challenges but will likely avoid total annihilation by harnessing and adapting to emergent technologies.

As the century progresses, civilization will evolve toward a fragmented yet technologically advanced landscape:

Geo-Technological Fragmentation: Multiple economic and geopolitical blocs, heavily armed but deterred from full-scale conflict by mutual vulnerability.
Cyborg Integration: Large populations adopting cybernetic enhancements, dramatically reshaping human identity.
Decentralization: Governments weakened, with new political entities emerging, such as powerful multinational tech corporations and decentralized digital communities.
Space Expansion: Robust expansion into space, acting as a frontier for innovation, resource extraction, and escape from terrestrial crises.

🌌 Conclusion & Nuance:

The 21st century represents humanity’s true transition period:

It will not be peaceful — it’s a chaotic, conflicted, and tumultuous era.
Yet it will not necessarily be humanity’s demise — rather, a profound evolutionary pressure.
Through crisis, new governance forms, and accelerated technological development, humanity likely survives the Great Filter — but at great social, psychological, and political cost.

By century’s end, humans may no longer resemble the species of today, neither physically nor mentally. Whether this scenario feels hopeful or dystopian depends greatly on how societies manage emerging tech, geopolitical competition, existential threats, and human dignity itself.

In short, the 21st century will be defined by survival through transformation.