Table of Links Abstract and 1 Introduction Abstract and 1 Introduction The threat posed by AI to all technical civilisations Multiplanetary mitigating strategies and technology progression Timescales and confrontation with the data AI regulation Conclusions, Declaration of competing interest, Acknowledgements, and References The threat posed by AI to all technical civilisations The threat posed by AI to all technical civilisations Multiplanetary mitigating strategies and technology progression Multiplanetary mitigating strategies and technology progression Timescales and confrontation with the data Timescales and confrontation with the data AI regulation AI regulation Conclusions, Declaration of competing interest, Acknowledgements, and References Conclusions, Declaration of competing interest, Acknowledgements, and References 3. Multiplanetary mitigating strategies and technology progression In our analysis thus far, we have assumed that AI and biological systems are co-located in the same limited physical space. As soon as this is no longer true, the existential threats that we have described in section 2 are no longer so stringent. For example, a multiplanetary biological species [42] could take advantage of independent experiences on different planets, diversifying their survival strategies and possibly avoiding the single-point failure that a planetary-bound civilisation faces. A multiplanetary civilization could distribute its risk across several widely separated celestial bodies, reducing the likelihood of simultaneous destruction across all platforms. This distributed model of existence increases the resilience of a biological civilization to AIinduced catastrophes by creating redundancy. If one planet or outpost in space falls to a misalignment of AI's goals with biological interests, others may survive and immediately learn from these failures. Moreover, the expansion into multiple widely separated locations provides a broader scope for experimenting with AI. It allows for isolated environments where the effects of advanced AI can be studied without the immediate risk of global annihilation. Different planets or outposts in space could serve as test beds for various stages of AI development, under controlled conditions. We know from our own experience that AI is progressing at a breath-taking pace. However, the same is not true of our own efforts to become a multiplanetary civilisation. Space is hard, and unfortunately, we seem to be a lot closer to achieving a technical singularity than realizing a truly multi-planetary, space faring capability. The disparity between the rapid advancement of AI and the slower progress in space technology is stark. The technical singularity—a hypothetical point where AI surpasses human intelligence and capability—could occur within just a few decades, according to some predictions. In contrast, establishing a self-sustaining, multi-planetary human civilisation seems like a monumental task that may take many decades [43], possibly centuries. The essence of the problem lies in the nature of the challenges each domain faces. AI development is largely a computational and informational challenge, accelerated by the exponential growth of data and processing power. While AI can theoretically improve its own capabilities almost without physical constraints, space travel must contend with energy limitations, material science boundaries, and the harsh realities of the space environment. In addition, there are unsolved issues with respect to multiplanetary governance, biomedical and behaviour and logistical issues [44, 45, 46]. Given this potential universality of technological evolution, the implications for biological civilizations are profound. The race to develop AI could inadvertently prioritize advancements that lead to existential risks, overshadowing the slower-paced, yet arguably more vital, endeavour of becoming a multiplanetary species. Ironically, AI is likely to be a key tool in achieving the technical breakthroughs necessary to realise this goal. Author: (1) Michael A. Garrett (Corresponding Author), Jodrell Bank Centre for Astrophysics, Dept. of Physics & Astronomy, Alan Turing Building, Oxford Road, University of Manchester, M13 9PL, UK. (michael.garrett@manchester.ac.uk). Author: Author: (1) Michael A. Garrett (Corresponding Author), Jodrell Bank Centre for Astrophysics, Dept. of Physics & Astronomy, Alan Turing Building, Oxford Road, University of Manchester, M13 9PL, UK. (michael.garrett@manchester.ac.uk). This paper is available on arxiv under CC BY 4.0 DEED license. This paper is available on arxiv under CC BY 4.0 DEED license. available on arxiv available on arxiv
