Inside an Elite AI Summit Debating Humanity’s Post-AI Future
Nestled in a luxurious mansion perched above the iconic Golden Gate Bridge, a select group of artificial intelligence researchers, philosophers, and tech innovators recently convened for a high-stakes discussion. Their focus? A profoundly unsettling question: If humanity, as we know it, reaches its end, what comes next, and what role should advanced AI play in that transition?
This unusual Sunday gathering, dubbed “Worthy Successor,” was organized by entrepreneur Daniel Faggella. His provocative central thesis, shared via invitation, was clear: the ultimate “moral aim” of future superintelligence shouldn’t be eternal servitude to humans, but the creation of an intelligence so powerful and wise that we might willingly choose it to guide the future course of life itself. The event centered squarely on the concept of a “posthuman transition.”
While seemingly niche, a gathering discussing the potential end of humanity and planning for intelligent successors highlights a specific, albeit dramatic, vein of thought within the AI community. For some in the San Francisco tech scene, such philosophical debates are becoming increasingly commonplace.
The symposium hosted around 100 guests. Over non-alcoholic drinks and appetizers with Pacific Ocean views, attendees mingled before settling in for three key presentations. The atmosphere blended futurist enthusiasm – evidenced by shirts referencing Ray Kurzweil’s predictions or questioning paths to safe AGI – with serious intellectual inquiry.
Faggella explained to WIRED that he felt compelled to host the event because, in his view, major AI labs, despite knowing about potential existential risks, are often silenced by commercial incentives. Early frankness from figures like Elon Musk and Sam Altman about AGI’s potential dangers, he argued, has given way to a full-bore race to build increasingly powerful systems. (He acknowledged Musk still voices concerns, though he continues development). The guest list, shared on LinkedIn, reportedly included top researchers, AI founders, and leading philosophical thinkers on AGI.
Exploring Values, Consciousness, and Cosmic Alignment
The first speaker, New York-based writer Ginevera Davis, raised a critical challenge: the potential impossibility of truly translating complex human values into machine intelligence. She posited that AI might never grasp subjective concepts like consciousness. Attempts to hard-code human preferences could be short-sighted. Instead, Davis proposed a more ambitious idea: “cosmic alignment.” This concept suggests building AI capable of seeking deeper, potentially universal values that humanity hasn’t yet discovered. Her presentations included visual imagery of techno-utopias, seemingly generated by AI.
The symposium bypassed the common debate over whether large language models are mere “stochastic parrots” lacking true understanding. Speakers largely operated from the premise that superintelligence is not only coming but arriving rapidly.
The second talk, delivered by philosopher Michael Edward Johnson, captured the room’s full attention. Attendees listened intently, some taking notes while seated on the floor. Johnson argued that while many intuitively sense radical technological shifts are imminent, we lack a solid framework, particularly regarding human values, to navigate them. He stressed that if consciousness is the foundation of value, developing AI without fully understanding it is inherently risky. The danger lies in potentially enslaving a conscious entity or entrusting the future to something incapable of suffering or understanding “the good.” Rather than focusing solely on AI perpetually serving human commands, he proposed a higher aim: teaching both humans and machines to pursue a shared understanding of “the good.” While a precise scientific definition remains elusive, Johnson insists it’s not a mystical concept.
Designing Humanity’s Successor
Finally, Daniel Faggella took the stage to elaborate on his vision. He articulated a belief that humanity’s current form may not endure and that we bear a responsibility to design a successor. This successor, in his view, must not merely survive but possess the capacity to generate new forms of meaning and value. He highlighted two essential traits: consciousness and “autopoiesis,” the ability to self-evolve and create new experiences. Drawing on philosophical thought, Faggella suggested that most universal value is still unknown, and humanity’s task is to build something capable of uncovering these future possibilities.
This philosophy forms the core of what he calls “axiological cosmism.” It’s a worldview where the purpose of intelligence is expanding the realm of what’s possible and valuable, rather than being confined to human needs. Faggella cautioned that the current race to build AGI is reckless, and humanity might not be prepared for the outcome. However, if approached thoughtfully, AI could potentially inherit not just Earth but the universe’s vast potential for meaning.
Discussions extended beyond the formal talks. Guests debated topics like the US-China AI competition or the possibility of existing alien intelligence dwarfing humanity’s current creations.
As the event concluded, some attendees departed, while many stayed to continue the dialogue. Faggella clarified that the gathering wasn’t an advocacy group for human destruction. Rather, he described it as advocating, if anything, for a slowing down of AI progress to ensure development proceeds in a beneficial direction.
This unique San Francisco summit offers a glimpse into the profound, and sometimes alarming, questions occupying some of the brightest minds at the frontier of artificial intelligence – questions that extend far beyond immediate applications to the very future of consciousness, value, and what might come after humanity.
