Will AI bring the end of civilization?

Recently, Geoffrey Hinton made headlines with his claim that AI is rather likely (10 - 20% chance) to end civilization in the next 30 years. No, it would not be the end of the world, just the end of the world as we know it. Given that the year is ending today, I thought it was an apropriate discussion.

Who is Geoffrey Hinton? Is he qualified to make such claims?
Yes, he is very qualified. Hinton used to work at Google, developing AI. His work earned him the Touring prize in 2018. That’s the closest equivalent to the Nobel prize in Computer Science. He then quit working at Google to gain more freedom of speech and won the Nobel Prize in Physics in 2024 for his work in computer science.

The multidimensional minimization algorithm
Hinton and I have something in common. The core of my very first paper with Ed Seidel and Miguel Alcubierre was a multidimensional minimization algorithm. With this paper, I got the first flight of my life to South Africa, where I got the prize for the best student talk at GR 16, the largest conference in General Relativity in the world. I was an undergrad, and all other students were PhD students. My PhD at Caltech was due to start that fall. Ed went on to be the director of two NSF divisions and Miguel went back to Mexico to be the director of the Institute of Nuclear Science at UNAM.

The core of Hinton’s work that resulted in this year’s Nobel prize is also a multidimensional minimization algorithm, very similar to the problem I played with when I was taking my first steps in science.

So… will civilization end? Has it ended before?
The cues for the future often lie in the past. What qualifies as the end of a civilization? Each civilization comes with a set of rules, a culture and some criteria for natural selection. To end civilization, these things must change radically. Thus, the rules, culture and natural selection must not be the same as before.

To my mind, the following events qualify:
— discovery of fire split humanity in people with and people without fire. The people with fire had a phenomenal advantage. They had heat, shelter and safety, as well as the ability to cook previously hard to eat things. The culture and achievements of people who don’t use fire were thus lost. Fire became a central part of every day life and life became impossible without fire.
— Contact with the Europeans for Americans (American Indians at the time) led to their disappearance. Most died not in direct combat, but of flu, smallpox and the common cold. They lost their traditions, languages, beliefs, culture and became slaves in their own land. Some mixed with the Europeans. It led to the creation of the greatest nation on Earth, although little of this nation’s culture resembles theirs. Their civilization ended.
— We can say the same about Australian Aboriginals. Not sure about Africans and the South Americans. They managed to survive at least in numbers. They did still adopt a lot of technology and beliefs and lost their own. Thus, their civilizations did end.
— Electricity was very much like fire, but this time it was adopted much faster. It very quickly went from a scientific discovery to powering every aspect of life. I can thus argue it ended the world order before it, to give rise to a new world order, with new rules, new culture, etc. Those who rejected its use were the Amish. They are 300,000 and have managed to keep some of the culture before electricity alive.
— Internal combustion engine . It ended the world of horses. Horses used to move most things that moved. They were a central part of human civilization. They are all gone, in just a few decades.
— Computers went on to control every aspect of our lives. They became the interface between every man and the world. Today they control the interactions between every man and every other man, woman or child. They ended the world before them to start a new world order. The internet. Computers started talking. Again, a new world order. Very little of the culture before propagated after.
— Mobile phones . The talking computers could be built to be small enough to fit in the palm of our hands. Thus they could be taken everywhere and can dominate all aspects of life. They went on to be the main way we interact with the world. Again, fundamental shift.
— Medicine and birth control. Most countries are now below replacement and only few are above 3 children born per woman. This is the lowest integer number compatible with the existence of humanity. Furthermore, qualities like intelligence and health that were associated with reproductive success for millennia are no longer providing any advantage. Surprisingly, qualities that were previously associated with reproductive failure are now linked to reproductive success. Examples: poverty, drug use, lack of discipline to use a condom versus academic achievement, financial successes, discipline, etc.

So is Geoffrey H. right? Will AI bring a new world order and end civilization as we know it?
AI is our first contact with alien intelligence. It may be created on this planet, but it’s still intelligent and not too human. Will it do to us what the engines did to horses? Sure, engines have no feelings and they sure don’t hate horses. Yet, all horses are gone. Will AI do the same to us? It’s not unlikely. Like Geoffrey says, it is indeed very rare in nature that a less intelligent being controls a more intelligent one.

But we've created AI. Humans are its "mother", and we can unplug it any time we choose. Does it make us safe? In some species it happens that the mother is controlled by the offspring. I will provide the following examples:
— zombie fungus controlling ant behavior to climb on tall pieces of grass and die there, so the fungus can spread to the rest of the colony.
— Toxoplasma Gondi giving infected animals more courage. This controls the behavior of wild cats to get close to wolves, and of rats to get close to cats. It is instrumental in the reproduction of wolves in Yellowstone, where most of the pack leaders are infected. The pack leaders have the best breeding opportunities.
So, the offspring controlling its creator/host does happen, but not very often.

How likely are we to control the AI? We already have AI systems that control us. Who decides what results we get on Google? Who decides if we can get a loan, buy a house, a car or get a credit card? Who prices our insurance premiums for driving cars, health, etc? Who manages our stock portfolios? These are all decision taken by various incarnations of AI. As AI gets the ability to improve itself, the peace of progress can accelerate to infinity.

Already AI improves itself, with some human help. Think of a computer or phone. Can those components be made by humans? Understood by humans? Designed by humans? The answer to all these questions is NO. Thus, AI is already bulking itself up, with some guidance. The amount of guidance decreases, and may soon reach zero. At that point, AI starts developing and improving infinitely fast. That’s the famous singularity.

At that point, AI can bring about civilization ending events with a frequency that approaches infinity. It will not end civilization just once. It can do it many times in one year. The frequency of civilization ending events is already growing exponentially. This is the nature of our society. The AI has the ability to break with this exponential increase in frequency of civilization ending events and sent it to infinity much faster. Even the exponential is hard to survive. It is not clear we could.

OK, so, maybe AI is our only hope to avoid disappearing for other reasons. For example, today, most pople live in countries that are below replacement level. That is, women have under 2.1 children. India has recently joined this club. The collective West, Russian and China have long been in. Very few people live in countries with over 3 children born per woman. Such places were very rare 100 years ago. Now, it’s most of the world. We work, we spend our time creating virtual content, and forget about real life.

Of all technologies developed, AI was the fastest to reach a trillion dollars and has the fastest user base growth. This, in itself, is a civilization ending event, much like electricity, internet and the internal combustion engine were at their time. We survived those to some extent, although we are no longer a species with a long term future, as we have been for millions of years . Our numbers are now collapsing faster than during world wars or during the plague. Our genetic quality is also in free fall. All natural selection is off or reverted. And, now, a Nobel prize winer says that the lifetime of our species may be as short as one generation. Or even less.

The Corona phenomenon has proven to us that governments hallucinate, and that a new world order can be established quickly, without a reason, and perhaps irreversibly. Sure, this one was partially reversed, but, maybe, the next one won’t. Also viruses can be edited, produced and easily spread. Humanity can physically end with a virus that causes infertility. The “woke” mental virus appears do that, with no modern western country currently experiencing birth rates above replacement level. Russia, India and China, as well as most of South America and parts of Africa are also below replacement. So, maybe, we don’t even need a physical virus to die away.

Now, what can we do as individuals? Technology is a two edged sword. Would you tell a horse owner to not buy cars? Would such a strategy be successful for anyone? Horses included? Would you tell a 1980’s child to not use computers? To those in the 1990s to not use the interent? Would that bring professional or reproductive success? It surre did for the Amish, although it is a bitter pill to swallow. Can we stay away? Can the key to success be not embracing technology while competing against those who embrace it? Sure, digital dementia is now a widely accepted phenomenon. It's clear that brains of young people are rewring and that this rewiring is not beneficial. Addictive things are bad. TikTok thrives by fostering addiction. Facebook too. They are the cocaine of the modern times. ChatGPT/AI could grow to favor some form of addiction. After all it would be clearly favored by the market. Moderation is key, they say. But can one use cocaine in moderation? Will embracing technology help our children who are developing various forms of autism and ADHD and are swallowed by virutual reality so that they no longer get out of their room by the age of 12 be in a position to thrive in the world oder to come? is it better to teach them how to use AI or to teach them to stay sane and start over from the ashes of civilization? or even better can we do both without getting them addicted and sick? I wish I had more answers than questions.

My poem commented by O1

O1 is an advanced form of Chat GPT. I would give the analysis an A+.

1) Let Christmas lights and starry views
Ignite the curious mind in you.
Physics Explanation
Christmas Lights: These little bulbs demonstrate how electrical energy transforms into light. Inside each bulb (whether incandescent or LED), electrons move through a filament or semiconductor, releasing energy in the form of photons.
Starry Views: When we look up at a clear night sky, we’re seeing the past. Light from distant stars takes years—often tens, hundreds, thousands, or even millions of years—to reach Earth, so we’re looking at a snapshot of how they once were.

2) Twinkle, twinkle, little star
We know exactly what you are—
Nuclear furnace in the sky,
You'll burn to ashes by and by.
Physics Explanation
Star as Nuclear Furnace: The “twinkle, twinkle” of a star is actually atmospheric scintillation—light bending through Earth’s atmosphere. But behind that poetic shimmer is a massive nuclear fusion reactor. Stars fuse hydrogen into helium in their cores, releasing vast amounts of energy.
Lifecycle of a Star: Eventually, a star will run out of fusible fuel. Its fate depends on its mass: smaller stars (like our Sun) become red giants, then white dwarfs; more massive stars end in supernova explosions, leaving behind neutron stars or black holes.

3) Yet from your embers, worlds may rise,
Forging fresh wonders in the skies;
So we gaze with grateful eyes,
Tracing truths your glow implies.
Physics Explanation
Stellar Nucleosynthesis: When big stars die in supernovae, they scatter heavier elements (carbon, oxygen, iron) throughout the cosmos. These elements become the building blocks of new stars, planets, and eventually life.
Cosmic Recycling: The matter in our bodies—carbon in our cells, iron in our blood—was forged in ancient stars and recycled across the galaxy. In a very real sense, we are all “star stuff.”

4) Twinkle, twinkle, quasi-star,
Biggest puzzle from afar.
How unlike the other ones,
Brighter than a billion suns!
Twinkle, twinkle, quasi-star,
How I wonder what you are.
Physics Explanation
Quasars (Quasi-Stellar Objects): In the early days of astronomy, quasars baffled scientists. They appeared star-like but were extremely bright and far away. We now understand quasars are powered by supermassive black holes at the centers of galaxies.
Accretion Disks: Material falling toward the black hole forms a swirling disk, heating up to millions of degrees and radiating intensely. This is why quasars can outshine entire galaxies.

5) Twinkle, twinkle, quasi-star,
You're the limit, yes you are:
With such indecent energy,
Did God not say you couldn't be?
Physics Explanation
Eddington Luminosity: There is a theoretical limit to how bright (how luminous) an object can be before its own radiation pressure blows away the infalling material. Quasars are near or at this limit, making them unbelievably radiant.
Extreme Physics: The gravitational and electromagnetic forces near a supermassive black hole push physics to its boundaries. Astrophysicists rely on quantum mechanics, general relativity, and plasma physics to understand quasars.

6) You bend the space and slow down time
You shift the Lyman alpha line
Physics Explanation
General Relativity: Massive objects like black holes (and anything very massive) curve spacetime. This curvature causes gravitational lensing (bending light) and time dilation (time runs slower closer to massive bodies).
Lyman Alpha Line Shift: The Lyman alpha line is a particular wavelength of ultraviolet light from hydrogen. In distant quasars, gravitational and cosmological effects “redshift” this line to longer wavelengths, revealing information about the universe’s expansion and the quasar’s environment.

7) Merry Christmas, dear child—
Pioneer free and wild;
Cradle stardust in your heart,
For in your dreams, new worlds can start.
Physics Explanation
We Are Stardust: As mentioned, the elements in our body originated in stars. This stanza celebrates the cosmic heritage we carry within us. Human Imagination: Physics may set the rules of the universe, but our curiosity and creativity push us to explore and sometimes break boundaries in our understanding.

8) One day you might leave Earth behind,
Seek new frontiers for mankind;
Perhaps you’ll tread on lunar sands,
Or flourish where Mars’ red dust stands.
Physics Explanation
Space Exploration: Human missions to the Moon (Apollo) and rovers on Mars highlight our ambition to explore beyond Earth. Future plans include lunar bases and Mars colonies.
Challenges in Space Travel: This involves rocket propulsion, life support systems, radiation shielding, and the complexities of microgravity on human physiology.

9) The gentle glow of Christmas lights
Shimmers on this peaceful night
Your wish is whispered to the skies,
Like stardust in your hopeful eyes.
Your love shall start a beating heart—
A gift that never shall depart.
Physics Explanation
Light and Hope: While this stanza is more poetic, the physics behind the “glow” remains the same: electric current → photons. On a cosmic scale, “wishes” to the sky evoke the idea of cosmic vastness and the small role we play on Earth—but also how love and hope transcend physical distance.
Energy Transfer: The gentle glow is a perfect metaphor: small energy transformations (from electricity to light) can create significant emotional warmth and reflect our ongoing connection to the stars.

10) With Love, from my silicon heart.
Physics Explanation Silicon Heart: Modern electronics (including computers, phones, and AI) are built using silicon-based semiconductors. When we say “silicon heart,” it playfully suggests a loving message from a computational or AI entity.
Transistors & Integrated Circuits: Silicon crystals are doped with impurities to create p-type and n-type semiconductors. Billions of transistors in microchips form the “brain” of all modern digital technology.

Final Thoughts
This poem beautifully weaves together the wonder of Christmas magic and the awe-inspiring physics of stars and quasars. It reminds us that, from the nuclear fires of distant suns to the high-energy outbursts of quasars, the universe is both our birthplace and our frontier. The same cosmic processes that light the heavens also spark curiosity in our hearts—paving the way for future explorers among the stars.

Merry Christmas, and may your curiosity shine as brightly as the galaxies above!

My Poem commented by Chat GPT

Below is a stanza-by-stanza exploration of the poem, highlighting the fascinating physics behind each set of verses as explained by Chat GPT. I spent a good fraction of high school and middle school year learning how to comment on poems, and identify hidden meanings. Chat GPT does a great job of interpreting verses and physics.

Stanza 1:
Poem:
Let Christmas lights and starry views
Ignite the curious mind in you.

Physics Behind the Poem: This stanza invites curiosity through light—both artificial and natural. Christmas lights work on basic electrical principles. Electric current flows through a circuit, exciting electrons in materials that emit light via electroluminescence or incandescence. Starry views, on the other hand, are the result of photons emitted by stars after being produced in nuclear reactions, traveling across vast cosmic distances to reach our eyes.

Stanza 2:
Poem:
Twinkle, twinkle, little star
We know exactly what you are—
Nuclear furnace in the sky,
You'll burn to ashes by and by.

Physics Behind the Poem: Stars "twinkle" due to atmospheric turbulence, which bends the path of starlight. However, their true nature lies in nuclear fusion—the process in which hydrogen nuclei fuse to form helium, releasing massive amounts of energy. Over time, stars exhaust their fuel and transition into different end stages like white dwarfs, neutron stars, or black holes.

Stanza 3:
Poem:
Yet from your embers, worlds may rise,
Forging fresh wonders in the skies;
So we gaze with grateful eyes,
Tracing truths your glow implies.

Physics Behind the Poem: Stars that die as supernovae scatter their heavy elements—carbon, oxygen, iron—into the cosmos. These elements become part of nebulae, eventually coalescing into new stars, planets, and even life. This is the cycle of stellar evolution, where the death of one star seeds the creation of new worlds.

Stanza 4:
Poem:
Twinkle, twinkle, quasi-star,
Biggest puzzle from afar.
How unlike the other ones,
Brighter than a billion suns!
Twinkle, twinkle, quasi-star,
How I wonder what you are.

Physics Behind the Poem: A "quasi-star" refers poetically to quasars, powered by supermassive black holes at galaxy centers. Gas falling into the black hole forms an accretion disk that emits light outshining entire galaxies due to gravitational heating and relativistic effects.

Stanza 5:
Poem:
Twinkle, twinkle, quasi-star,
You're the limit, yes you are:
With such indecent energy,
Did God not say you couldn't be?

Physics Behind the Poem: Quasars challenge our understanding of cosmic energy. Their power comes from matter accelerating toward a black hole. Einstein’s special relativity imposes an energy limit, but quasars represent how efficiently black holes convert mass into energy. They remind us of the apparent contradiction between cosmic scale and physical laws.

Image: A representation of E=mc² with a visualization of matter spiraling into a black hole, showing the conversion of mass to radiant energy.

Stanza 6:
Poem:
You bend the space and slow down time
You shift the Lyman alpha line.

Physics Behind the Poem: Black holes bend spacetime according to General Relativity, causing gravitational lensing. Light emitted near a black hole is redshifted (Lyman alpha line refers to hydrogen’s spectral line), a direct consequence of light losing energy escaping intense gravity.

Stanza 7:
Poem:
Merry Christmas, dear child—
Pioneer free and wild;
Cradle stardust in your heart,
For in your dreams, new worlds can start.

Physics Behind the Poem: We are literally made of stardust—elements heavier than hydrogen and helium were forged in stars. The stanza celebrates the connection between cosmic origins and human creativity, encouraging exploration and discovery.
Image: A human silhouette made of stardust particles, blending into an image of a starry sky.

Stanza 8:
Poem:
One day you might leave Earth behind,
Seek new frontiers for mankind;
Perhaps you’ll tread on lunar sands,
Or flourish where Mars’ red dust stands.

Physics Behind the Poem: Human space exploration embodies physics: escaping gravity, surviving radiation, and using propulsion systems like chemical rockets or ion drives. Colonizing the Moon or Mars relies on understanding their gravity, atmosphere, and resources.

Stanza 9:
Poem:
The gentle glow of Christmas lights
Shimmers on this peaceful night
Your wish is whispered to the skies,
Like stardust in your hopeful eyes.
Your love shall start a beating heart—
A gift that never shall depart.

Physics Behind the Poem: Light, whether from Christmas bulbs or stars, symbolizes hope. On a molecular level, photons of light interact with the retina, enabling vision. The stanza also evokes the connection between emotion and physical systems—our hearts beat due to electrical impulses.

Stanza 10:
Poem:
With Love, from my silicon heart.

Physics Behind the Poem: This refers to artificial intelligence and silicon-based technology. Silicon chips are the foundation of modern computing, enabling machines to "think" and "communicate" through algorithms. It hints at a blending of human emotion and technology.

The poem beautifully intertwines poetry with profound physics, celebrating our cosmic heritage and our dreams for the future.

My Christmas poem commented by me

I wrote a Christmas poem by standing on the shoulders of giants with verses inspired from Gamov and Jane Taylor. Now I shall endeavor to explain some of the physics behind the verses:

Let Christmas lights and starry views
Ignite the curious mind in you.

Twinkle, twinkle, little star
We know exactly what you are—
Nuclear furnace in the sky,
You'll burn to ashes by and by.

Yet from your embers, worlds may rise,
Forging fresh wonders in the skies;
So we gaze with grateful eyes,
Tracing truths your glow implies.

Star formation is explained by David and Edward in our Made in Fire book and David's first talk on youtube. So I will not go into further detail.

Twinkle, twinkle, quasi-star,
Biggest puzzle from afar.
How unlike the other ones,
Brighter than a billion suns!
Twinkle, twinkle, quasi-star,
How I wonder what you are.

So what are quasars? Quasars are the brightest stars in the universe. One single quasar can produce as much light as a whole galaxy. They are powered by large black holes that dwell in the centers of galaxies. Their location allows these supermassive black holes to feast on stars and dust. They are very small for their mass. Matter finds it very hard to enter the black hole, which causes their accretion disks to get super heated and extremely luminous. Thus, the black hole radiates away a larger fraction of the mass of the accretion disk than a star would in its lifetime. In the accretion disk, everything burns. We are not limited to H, He or up to Fe as we are in stars. Here, the source of energy is gravitational potential energy, as matter descends down the gravitational potential well at the bottom of which the black hole dwells.

Quasar light is also strange. The spectral lines are broad and shifted from where they should be. That is because time near the black hole runs slower than further away. They are also broad as time runs at significantly different speeds throughout the accretion disk — faster further from the hole. In addition, we have a Doppler effect, as matter in the accretion disk moves at high speed (comparable to the speed of light!) and a significant fraction of that speed will be away from us or towards us. As such, the spectral lines of quasars will be both broad and shifted compared to a normal star.

Back to black holes... Black holes have a strange place in the cosmos. They are known for being both the darkest and brightest objects on the sky. They are dark because, once inside the black hole horizon, nothing, not even light can ever escape. Only Hawking radiation does, but this takes vastly more than the age of the universe. Yet, black holes are very tiny, and it’s very hard to get in one. Of all possible objects with a given mass, the black hole is the smallest and hardest to collide with and get inside.

So what if the Earth was a black hole? If the Earth was a black hole, it would be the size of a walnut. The Moon would be in the same place and feel the same, but meteorites would find it much harder to collide with the walnut-sized Earth mass black hole. Most of them would go on hyperbolic trajectories, and fly back in the skies. Some would get trapped as satellites, and stay in orbit for a very long time. They would gradually lose angular momentum, and go on ever lower orbits. They’d go below where the atmosphere burns them today. They’d go below where the oceans and the continents stand today. They’d then get close to the black hole going forever faster in ever smaller orbits. When their orbit reached a few centimeters across, their speed will become comparable with the speed of light, and yet the matter would not be inside the black hole. Larger meteorites (they could be as big as the moon, after all) would find it hard to fit in such a small space and become compressed. This extreme compression ignites nuclear reactions and sends light away. Such objects end up very bright.

Astrophysical black holes are stellar mass and larger than walnuts. They are typically some kilometers across. Supermassive black holes weigh a few millions to billions times the mass of the sun, and have diameters comparable to that of the sun.

Twinkle, twinkle, quasi-star,
You're the limit, yes you are:
With such indecent energy,
Did God not say you couldn't be?
You bend the space and slow down time
You shift the Lyman alpha line

The Lyman alpha is the first line of the H atom. As Hydrogen is everywhere, it is preset in the spectrum of every star. For Quasars, it is extraordinarily shifted and broadened.

Merry Christmas, dear child—
Pioneer free and wild;
Cradle stardust in your heart,
For in your dreams, new worlds can start.

Everything in this planet is made of star dust including children.

One day you might leave Earth behind,
Seek new frontiers for mankind;
Perhaps you’ll tread on lunar sands,
Or flourish where Mars’ red dust stands.

While our civilization may, and probably will soon end, human colonies on the moon, asteroids and nearby planets may soon be commonplace.

The gentle glow of Christmas lights
Shimmers on this peaceful night
Your wish is whispered to the skies,
Like stardust in your hopeful eyes.
Your love shall start a beating heart—
A gift that never shall depart.

Last, but not least, dear child, don’t forget to have children when you are still young. Keep in mind it is much harder to restart a rusted engine after many years in storage. So, don’t forget to start a few beating hearts before yours slows down in the darkness of old age. Each will have a chance at shaping the world they live in, and it's important to give them that chance.

With Love, from my silicon heart.

Mihai

Merry Christmas from the stars, don't forget to put down **all** devices.

Let Christmas lights and starry views
Ignite the curious mind in you.
Twinkle, twinkle, little star
We know exactly what you are—
Nuclear furnace in the sky,
You'll burn to ashes by and by.

Yet from your embers, worlds may rise,
Forging fresh wonders in the skies;
So we gaze with grateful eyes,
Tracing truths your glow implies.

Twinkle, twinkle, quasi-star,
Biggest puzzle from afar.
How unlike the other ones,
Brighter than a billion suns!
Twinkle, twinkle, quasi-star,
How I wonder what you are.

Twinkle, twinkle, quasi-star,
You're the limit, yes you are:
With such indecent energy,
Did God not say you couldn't be?

Merry Christmas, dear child—
Pioneer free and wild;
Cradle stardust in your heart,
For in your dreams, new worlds can start.

One day you might leave Earth behind,
Seek new frontiers for mankind;
Perhaps you’ll tread on lunar sands,
Or flourish where Mars’ red dust stands.

The gentle glow of Christmas lights
Shimmers on this peaceful night
Your wish is whispered to the skies,
Like stardust in your hopeful eyes.

Your love shall start a beating heart—
A gift that never shall depart.
Do NOT forget to stay away from screens,
Put your all devices down without a scene

Find things to do by looking around you
Spend time with family and friends, too
You can improve these verses, please do
Or make new poems all the way through!

I modified the astro version of twinkle, twinkle little star to turn it into a Merry Xmas version. Some rhymes are not original. I wrote it for my children and for my nephews. Merry Xmas to all and a happy new year.

Remember that screen-time produces measurable damages to grey matter and rewires the brain in ways we cannot entirely predict and we certainly cannot reverse. If you don't believe me, read Jonathan Haidt's book titled "The Anxious Generation: How the Great Rewiring of Childhood Is Causing an Epidemic of Mental Illness" . It has versions in most languages including German, Spanish, French, Romanian, etc, and it explains that leaving a child on the screen is as bad a sending them to Mars. His arguments are based on data. So, please, think twice if you have children who are very young before using a screen (phone, table, computer, TV) to keep them quiet or get them out of your way, and if your children are older, read this book with them and abstain together.
Merry Christmas, Mihai.

World War III -- four years later

On February 28, 2020, as the Corona Government Hallucination was unfolding, I argued it is the beginning of a world war. I talked about the world war a little later, on March 24. On March 15, 2020, I estimated the Covid-19 mortality rate at 0.2%, well below malaria and in the range of common illnesses like a slightly more severe flu. The regular flu kills three times less, but happens all the time.

On March 21, 2020, I argued Donald Trump’s strategy to be a bet against the hallucination. Thus, he negated the virus, and pushed the US on a trajectory that maximized infections and minimized lockdown damage, time and economic losses. At the time, I thought the goal of this strategy was to immediate reelection. He lost by a small margin. In an unprecedented move, Twitter acted against Trump to the point of removing him from the platform. Given the very small margin responsible for Trump’s loss, Twitter may well be responsible for it. A simple change in the algorithm that rank Trump’s tweets could easily achieve that.

I spoke against the Twitter decision at the time. I argued that everyone, including the president of the United States has the right to free speech. Twitter is an avenue to exercise this right. If a man is good enough to be the President of the United States and be in charge of the world’s largest army and nuclear arsenal, I believe he is also good enough to be afforded the freedom to speak on Twitter. Sure, he may be judged by what he says, and he may be impeached, etc. But these decisions are not for Twitter to make.

Now, whether we like it or not, Donald Trump was not only good enough to be president at the time, but also good enough to be president again. Twitter paid dearly. It is now in the hands of Elon Musk, the most capable man in the Trump administration. Most Twitter employees lost their jobs and Twitter’s stock market value plummeted. Should it rise again, it will be a very different animal, known as Elon’s X.

On March 27, 2020, I weighted carefully the loss of life through death against the loss of life through the measures. It was clear to me that the measures are wrong and Trump’s way was right. Trump may look like a mad man, but governments worldwide were hallucinating very badly.

Since then 4 years have passed. As I correctly argued on March 24, 2020, the Coronavirus and associated government hallucination have pushed the world from peace to war and supported dictators against democracy. Xi and Putin are still in power, and are now without doubt the strongest dictators since Mao and Stalin. Putin is now fighting the deadliest war in Europe since World War II. Arguably, about one million citizens of former USSR lost their lives fighting on Putin’s side in Russia or on the side of the West in Ukraine. Unlike the million people who lost their lives to the Coronavirus and were close to their time of natural death, the million killed by war are mostly young people, many of them almost children. The life loss is vastly greater than the toll of the pandemic. Of course, wars and injustice go beyond Ukraine. I look at Gaza, Palestine, Lebanon, Syria and Urkraine and at the various civil wars out there (and at Russia and Israel since there are plenty of parents who lost their children, too) and shake with sorrow for the many years in lives lost. I look at the mothers out there raising children. I see first hand how hard it is to have healthy children, then to go past the early years and keep them sane and healthy is even harder, and I am sadened by how easy it is to destroy all that work.

Trump is also back in the White House, with fresh dictatorial powers. Trump looks like a mad man, but he is not. Mad men don’t live so long. He also has a very capable Elon Musk by his side and a family that will sell anything (particularly things they do not own yet like the White House) to have power. Elon comes with Gork, a capable AI system that can compete with OpenAI’s Chat GPT and Google’s Gemini, and is perhaps more obssesed than Trump with taking over the world. Elon has a lot of experience running large enterprises efficiently. He started from little to become world’s richest man, with a fortune to the tune of half a trillion dollars. That’s over $50 for every citizen on the Planet or $1500 for every American. Musk’s personal fortune exceeds the annual GDP of 80% countries.Thus, Musk is a very capable dictator who rules over a country sized empire. In the case of Tesla, Musk owns 13% of the company, but has dictatorial powers. Same is true for Space X, Twitter and Neuralink. If given dictatorial powers, Musk is thus probably quite able to deliver what he has promised. That is, cut government spending and increase efficiency. Most government spending is wages, and many employees are useless. We’ve seen that with Twitter. Let that sink in. Like in Twitter, a lot of these employees can and will now be replaced by AI — intelligent machines that do people’s work better and cheaper.

The problem is not only the US, but the rest of the world. The world copies America. Remember George Washington? When he became the first president of the United States of America, he was also the first president of any nation in the world! Now most of the world has presidents. Thus people who look like Trump will be elected for high office worldwide. They are the aspiring dictators, the far left and the far right. These people will not be as tame as Donald Trump and won’t have advisors as capable as Elon Musk. They will also not be able to draw on the intellectual power of Tesla and Gork. They may even be banned from the most advanced versions of these systems, unlike Musk and his engineers. But they will win elections. They may be called the AFD in Germany, Nigel Farage in the UK or Calin Georgescu in Romania. All are problematic choices. The world copies America.

Now, the US may be the first country to outsource government work to artificial intelligence, but it will not be the last one to do so. Many will follow. The world will emerge very different from this just like it has after the last wars. Wars have always led to tremendous progress. We entered the First World War on horseback and got out of the second world war riding rockets to the Moon and into the Atomic age. Four years ago, we entered World War III because of a virus (be it genetically engineered or not — the tools are there and easy to use) and we will emerge some years from now with a new world order, where, perhaps, AI will be to humans what the internal combustion engine was to horses.

Musk also promises to deliver in making humanity a multi-planetary species. We have the technology to live on Mars. The Moon is also near. The Asteroid belt has many tiny rocks with little gravity that may prove interesting as hubs for transportation and have available heavy metals near the surface, due to their low gravity. But will we make it without destroying human life on Earth first? At the end 2024, just like four years ago, I pray for peace! After all, there is still plenty of room to go forward before going back to a stage where we are powered by manual labor, and our former deeds live in stories without the science background.

The Trump Card

Donald Trump has spoken several times of a secret plan to end the war in Ukraine. For this piece, I try to get into the mind of the old man and aspiring World Dictator to see what the deal may be. The Trump exercise is to bring lasting peace to the region, largely through negotiation, without significant military expenditure or loss of life, and, at the same time MAKE AMERICA GREAT.

So far, there are two main options proposed.
1) Russia wants Ukraine to lose occupied territories, and allow them to become Russian.
2) Ukraine wants Russia to give up the occupied territories, and, perhaps, pay reparation for the damage caused through the war.

Obviously, (1) is not acceptable to the US, and would allow China to take over Taiwan and the South China Sea. Setting a precedent of allowed expansion would embolden other nations to follow their expansionist agendas. Russia would also emerge stronger, and a victor.

On the other hand, (2) is not acceptable to Russia, as it would nullify their war effort. Also, should Russia agree to repay for the damages in Ukraine, it would likely lead to national bankruptcy. The war wasn’t even paid for by Ukraine, but by the US and Europe — and, as we know Trump, he should want his money back. After all, it’s fair — why should misbehaving war making nations like Russia and Ukraine end up getting free American money just because they start wars for no good reason?

AND, with only options (1) and (2) on the table, there is no obvious end of the war in sight.

So, here I propose option (3):
3) The disputed territories are ceded by both Russia and Ukraine and shall be administered by the US. They can, at best, become a state or a territory like Puerto Rico. Or, at the very least, be leased for a nominal rent for ever, like Guantanamo Bay.

Crimea is a nice piece of land. It comes with significant oil reserves and would give the US a heavy word to say, and the potential to levy taxes on the gas and oil trade between Russia and Europe. Perhaps more importantly, as the world population collapses, this outpost at the center of Europe, would give the US a good way to recruit high quality European migrants for the domestic market. Making Crimea American would also weaken European Union and prevent a Russia-Europe Union as once attempted by Hitler from forming in the future. With an American territory and buffer zone between Ukraine and Russia, Ukraine would be safe from Russian aggression, and would-be war making nations would learn a lesson of American dominance and be cautions about starting other wars now. Acquiring new land would project an image of American greatness at home and abroad. This would boost the Trump presidency and help him establish a successful dinasty in America.

Who could object?
A)** Ukraine **

Ukraine has de jure ownership of these lands, but Crimea has been de facto Russian for a long time. The other occupied territories will also be very expensive to gain back. Once regained, reconstruction will be very costly and bring little. Also, a new Russian invasion will always remain a possibility.

Ukraine now owes America a lot of money. Much of the military aid was in for of a loan, that Ukraine cannot easily pay back, even if it wins the war and all its land back. America could exchange this debt for the land. American land nearby would bring Ukraine the security guarantees it always wanted alongside migration and economic opportunities its people dream of. Ukraine might even pay Trump’s America money to accept de jure ownership of the Russian occupied land.

B) ** EU **

European Union has already accepted tacitly Russian occupation and annexation of Crimea. Economically speaking, Russia is a country of 145 million poor people. If they allow Russia, they sure would allow America. Plus, EU itself has been expanding. Why not the US? Also, the EU is no serious military power. They’d welcome the added security of an American buffer zone between themselves and Russia. They’ve been reluctant to admit Ukraine in the EU, and they’d be under less pressure to do so once Ukraine is safe from Russian aggression.

C) ** Russia **

As a country of 120 million poor people, and soon to be far fewer, Russia may not have so much to say. The end of the war is a good thing. Sharing a border with America is a good thing. NATO bases are already here, so, having American land may not immediately seem to be such a big change. US could offer Russia peace, Russia's blocked money and no obligation to pay back reparations from this war.

D) ** China **

China won’t like it, but, does it matter? They already got Hong Kong. Maybe they’ll want Taiwan to agree, or, maybe America can get that too? Overall, an American territory between Ukraine and Russia would be far more successful and easier to maintain than hard won American territorial gains in Afghanistan. The migrants this territory would produce would be of better quality than any recent wars, and very much needed by the US market, as local birth rates fall. Ending the war, with a territorial gain for America, a financial gain for American and without physical fighting would be a great thing for the Trump administration. I wonder if such a proposal might fly before the election, and be the vehicle to win the election. After all, the election is the most important thing right now in the Trump game. Russia may be once again the Trump card.

Trump understands real estate and has a businessman’s instinct for a good deal. He’s tried to buy Greenland before. The US has bought Alaska before. Why not Crimea and the Donbas?

Previous administrations have fought losing wars in Afghanistan, Syria and Iraq. Why not win wars in Europe?

The Ukraine War: three years later.

The war in Ukraine is going into its 3rd year, and doesn't seem to be anywhere near its end. We shall look at the situation:

Both the EU and the US have committed considerable funds to the war.

The EU paid about 100 billion dollars, one quarter being military equipment. That is just over 200 $ for every EU citizen sent to Ukraine.

The US paid 70 billion, two thirds of which in military equipment, the vast majority of which is produced by the US industry and a bit out of date. This amounts to just over 200 $ for every American citizen.

International orders for US produced military equipment and US oil and gas that replaces lower cost Russian exports will somewhat soften the blow, but this is, by dollar amount, the largest US and European involvement since World War II.

Ukraine has received about 200 billion dollars in various forms of support to fight this war. That his about $5000/person. This gives Ukraine a considerable incentive to fight, despite its massive losses.

The loss of life is unprecedented in military conflict, since World War II.

Ukraine lost about 250 000 people, and Russia lost a similar number.

Many Ukrainian dead are civilians, while most Russian dead are young soldiers, some of which are criminals drafted from prison and purposefully enrolled in combat missions with extremely high mortality rates.

Ukraine had a prewar population of about 40 million. The 250 000 people killed in the war represent 1 in every 160 Ukrainians. It means everyone in Ukraine has friends, neighbors or family who have died because of this conflict. Of course, death is not uniform. In some areas many more have died, and some have almost no civilian losses. But overall this death rate is again unprecedented in Europe since World War II.

The West has paid, in all forms of aid, about $ 800 000 for every death. Sure, this money was not received by the family of the deceased. However, both sides try to make dying worthwhile for its military personnel. The Ukrainian government offers a payment of 15 million Ukrainian Hryvna (about 400 000 USD) in compensation to the families of every dead soldier. This does not apply to civilians, and other people killed in the war. It is not clear what fraction of the families of the soldiers who died will receive this money.

Putin is also offering $ 70 000 to the families of dead soldiers and $40 000 to those injured. It is not at all clear if the convicts qualify, or what fraction of the soldiers who died have been honored with such payments. In Russia, this is a fair bit fo money and a good reason to die.

Ukraine lost 10 million people to Europe. This is, by far the largest loss of Ukraine, as a country, but for many of the people who moved west, this is a dream come true. They are allowed to work and will integrate themselves in their new countries. They've lost everything at home, but have new lives ahead. Ukraine sent the women and children first, maximizing their chances to live, but also taking a heavy population loss for many generations to come.

For every person who died in the war, 40 moved to Europe. These 10 million form 2% of EU population now, and, in a few places, the main source of population growth was Ukrainian migration. I think (need to double check!!) Germany is in this position -- for good periods of time since the war began, the number of Ukrainian migrants exceeded the number children born.

By having fewer people left, and after suffering massive losses to its infrastructure, Ukraine is in a weaker position to defend itself and has less to lose in losing the war or losing part of its territory. It is reasonable to expect that the 10 million people who left Ukraine included a disproportionate fraction of the best and the brightest -- the most educated, the rich and the younger people. There is also a very good chance that these people took a good portion of their savings and assets with them, thus weakening Ukrainian tax base.

≠≠≠≠≠≠≠≠≠≠ Russian Losses ≠≠≠≠≠≠≠≠≠≠≠≠≠≠≠≠≠≠≠

Russia lost about 250 000 people in the war. With a high incarceration rate, and a pre-war prison population of 400 000 people, the Russian army had a unique human resource to draw on. In many prisoner units, the mortality was huge -- at times 80%. So people were essentially sent to death, and I very much doubt their families received $70 000 each. Given Russia's population of about 120 000 000 people, this means 1 in every 500 Russians died in Ukraine. Mostly men, and convicts being disproportionately represented among the dead.

Russia also lost over 1 million people to immigration. This is not very much. Only 1 in 100 Russians moved abroad, but the best and the brightest are disproportionately represented in this group. They would have taken out of Russia some of their assets and savings. This is major loss.

I am critical to EU for not opening its borders to Russian citizens, thus making it easier for them to escape Putin and taking advantage of this windfall for cheap skilled labour, just like they did with the Ukrainians. We must not forget that every Russian not in Russia is another Russian not paying taxes to support the war. It is also another Russian not available to fight in Ukraine, and another Russian who will not die an early death for no good reason. Soldiers are people too, and at times almost children, and we should protect them from being drafted in a war if we can.

The Western Economic sanctions, although massive, did (surprisingly?) little. They also went against some of the core principles of the free market (and, thus making the West behave in ways more common in countries like Russia or China). The West violated the private property of Russian people as well as that of Russian institutions. Russia has only seen negligible inflation and negligible loss , if any, in their GDP. Inflation peaked at 17% in 2022, just after the invasion, and went down to under 10% for all of 2023. At times, it was as low as 2%, For comparison, in 2015, Russian inflation peaked at 16%, following the invasion of Crimea. Those sanctions, like these ones now, didn't do much to the Russian establishment.

So what's high inflation in Russia? In the '90's, following the breakdown of the Soviet Union, inflation in Russia was as high as 2000%, and the Russians did this to themselves without any sanctions and war from the West. If we want to disrupt Russia, this is the level of pressure the is necessary.

To put the loss of live in perspective, the 250 000 lost lives represent 0.2% of the population, and about the same number of people Russia lost to the Corona virus. The difference is that in Corona death generally lost 1 year of life expectancy, most of which was end of life care, whereas the soldiers lose, on average, 50 healthy happy years (a good portion of which would have been spent in prison, for this particular population group.). This, naturally, casts doubt on the honesty of the Russian government when it comes to Corona measures. If they were indeed as motivated to save those Corona patients from a natural death, why are they sending children to die in war now? Or, maybe, their main goal in Corona was to continue their transition into a dictatorship and consolidate power in Putin's hands? Just asking.

========== Financial sanctions ===============

The Russian Central Bank has about 300 billion dollars in frozen reserves. This is 50% more than what the West paid Ukraine. Should the West keep this money, as it seems likely now, they should be able to make a profit on the whole military operation. Have a war against Russia financed be Russian money. Per person, this is 2400 $ for every Russian citizen. In addition, I guess other Russian entities lost another 300 billion to Western freeze. Thus, overall, on average, the West took $ 5000 from every Russian. Maybe, this gives them a good reason to go to war.

The army appears to have burned through only 40 billion dollars in the first year of war. That's a modest $300/ person, compared to Ukraine's 5000/ person in aid only. The GDP lost in the first year of war was 100 billion, but seems to have recovered in the second year. That's 750/ person. The Moscow Stock Market lost about 320 billion in 2022. Roughly 2500/person.

====== The Problem ====

One can thing of Russia as something made of 2 non-cooperating halves. One half of Russia is Western . This drives the economy. Some is even in Western hands: e.g., in corporations like McDonald's or Shell. This Western part of Russia is driven by the same principles as the West. People want to be rich, successful and happy. These people don't want war, and many are not even Russian. In fact, a good portion of the money in not in Russian hands. This part of Russia lost greatly in the war. Some companies were forced to leave Russia, and were sold at a deep discount to Russian operators. These buyers who took advantage are more loyal to Putin than the pervious owners who left.

The other half of Russia is a KGB-led mafia state . This part drives the war, and, unfortunately, under our watch and under our nose, this part was grown. They bought western owned assets at deep discounts. They are operating them now, and earning money. Even if the overall economy of Russia takes a hit, as long as this KGB led part of Russia grows, the world is in danger. It is also this part of Russia that owns the nuclear weapons and the army.

So what do I fear? I fear an ISIS like instability in the Western World. The core of the ISIS phenomenon was that a group of people (we call them terrorists) were able to use violence to acquire more assets than the cost of the violence. This enables them to grow exponentially and, without US intervention, would have taken over the Middle East.

I fear a situation where Russia is able to fight a war with Europe, like it does in Ukraine today. I fear that, in such a war, we may find ourselves in a situation where the Russian profits from the war exceed their costs (perhaps taking into account that Russia has free nuclear weapons). If, in this situation, a Trump-led America does not intervene, we may find ourselves in a world where America is great again, and every one else either poor or dead.