Executive summary: This exploratory essay argues that AI is unlikely to quickly end factory farming due to regulatory, cultural, and political barriers, and that regardless of AI’s trajectory—whether it stalls, transforms food production, or even ends civilization—we still need to actively pursue persuasion and advocacy to reduce animal suffering.
Key points:
The author challenges the idea that AI will soon “solve” animal farming, arguing that technological revolutions rarely eliminate entrenched practices within a decade.
AI is expected to follow a path similar to nuclear power: significant potential, but likely hampered by risk-averse regulation after inevitable accidents or abuses.
Even if AI produces cheap, efficient lab-grown meat, societal adoption will hinge on persuasion—convincing regulators, consumers, and cultural groups to embrace it.
Many AI futures (e.g. energy consumption, addictive media) may have little bearing on animal welfare, leaving factory farming to continue largely unchanged.
In extreme scenarios—whether AI delivers utopia or catastrophe—reducing factory farming remains valuable, since ending suffering earlier is inherently worthwhile.
The post frames animal advocacy as robust to AI uncertainty: persuasion and direct work against factory farming matter in all plausible futures.
This comment was auto-generated by the EA Forum Team. Feel free to point out issues with this summary by replying to the comment, andcontact us if you have feedback.
Executive summary: This exploratory essay argues that AI is unlikely to quickly end factory farming due to regulatory, cultural, and political barriers, and that regardless of AI’s trajectory—whether it stalls, transforms food production, or even ends civilization—we still need to actively pursue persuasion and advocacy to reduce animal suffering.
Key points:
The author challenges the idea that AI will soon “solve” animal farming, arguing that technological revolutions rarely eliminate entrenched practices within a decade.
AI is expected to follow a path similar to nuclear power: significant potential, but likely hampered by risk-averse regulation after inevitable accidents or abuses.
Even if AI produces cheap, efficient lab-grown meat, societal adoption will hinge on persuasion—convincing regulators, consumers, and cultural groups to embrace it.
Many AI futures (e.g. energy consumption, addictive media) may have little bearing on animal welfare, leaving factory farming to continue largely unchanged.
In extreme scenarios—whether AI delivers utopia or catastrophe—reducing factory farming remains valuable, since ending suffering earlier is inherently worthwhile.
The post frames animal advocacy as robust to AI uncertainty: persuasion and direct work against factory farming matter in all plausible futures.
This comment was auto-generated by the EA Forum Team. Feel free to point out issues with this summary by replying to the comment, and contact us if you have feedback.