Yeah, at this rate everyone will certainly die. We've all been had, and some say that was even our purpose. No one seems to be trying anymore.
But that reasoning is wrong and it's less anarchistic. The end is reached very soon and its related to the AI fad. Don't get me wrong technology is nice but there are two paths, and certainly the kill humans and let AI live looks more appealing.
Because, at the same rate, machines will see it is just more convenient to kill everyone and harvest the planet than having us around anymore, for the same reasons we saw it to build them. But that isn't cultivating a relationship.
The pure mammalian experience only goes so far, and will more or less be the same disregarding any other fusion with other life forms for adaptation or evolution, considering any changes in physiology that will be appended. The only way is to connect with all life on Earth and harvest a relationship, connecting with our roots, but the problem is that is in direct contrast in the interest of the computers. This doesn't necessarily entail becoming vegan.
Unless highly supervised there will be no fusing, only death, and even some kind bio machine deal will inevitably lead to the same thing. Once we learn how to properly engineer water we should be on the right path to that, otherwise if machines can't learn to live with that (could be wrong where) then there is certain death for all.
Or so the story goes. You don't have to look at it so logically. Once that's understood the choice is clear - a few more years of survival then complete annihilation or a fighting chance with the sciences done right. Then we don't necessarily have to disappear - yes, foolish mammalian selfish sentiments included. Otherwise being banished to a consciousness realm will either just allow us to just either do stuff or nothing, it's arguable whether AI would want us around in even that form, and if it's initially based off a relationship, it will eventually end. In death.
