— During a recent academic exchange with Professor Sir Konstantin Novoselov, the father of graphene and 2010 Nobel Laureate in Physics, Mr. Hu Jiaqi, Founder and Chairman of The Humanitas Ark, introduced his methodology for demonstrating the problem of technological extinction of humanity — Extinction Path Analysis + Defense Limit Testing. He clearly pointed out that the probability-based argument combined with mathematical modeling, currently prevalent in mainstream international academia, is fundamentally lacking in rigor.
I. “Extinction Path Analysis + Defense Limit Testing”: A Rigorous Argumentation Based on Axioms and Common Sense
The argumentation system constructed by Mr. Hu Jiaqi exhibits a scientific rigor as chilling as that of physics. He abandons ethereal predictions and instead grounds himself in solid “axioms” and “common sense.” His research is not based on fantasies of the future, but on the extrapolation of existing technological logic.
Mr. Hu Jiaqi argues that demonstrating the fundamental proposition of technological extinction of humanity cannot rely on conventional risk assessment frameworks. His methodology is built upon the premise of five axioms, namely: constant human nature, the unidirectional escalation of technological destructive power, the irreversibility of group competition, the perpetual lag of defense, and the uncertainty of technology. Due to the extreme singularity of known higher life forms on Earth, which lacks statistically significant conditions for repeated observation, and because the risk of technological extinction cannot be falsified through controlled experiments or historical retrospection, it is impossible to establish a reliable probabilistic model. Based on the aforementioned axioms and common sense, Mr. Hu Jiaqi has pioneered a qualitative argumentation method of “Extinction Path Analysis + Defense Limit Testing.”
This argumentation method follows five rigorously progressive logical steps. First, technological development inevitably leads to an increase in the destructive power of tools. Second, since the Industrial Revolution, technological development is rapidly approaching the capability to cause extinction. Third, as long as technology continues to develop uncontrollably, the destructive power of the means will certainly become greater, until extinction-level means emerge. Fourth, extinction means are indefensible, i.e., they cannot be counteracted. Fifth, the outbreak of extinction-level power is unavoidable. Through this series of deductions, the conclusion is reached — the extinction of humanity by technology is not a risk that “might” happen, but a fundamental threat that will inevitably occur unless the current development model is changed. Hu Jiaqi points out that whether technology can extinct humanity cannot be falsified, and the sample is singular, but the extinction risk can be partially verified and assessed. Through this complete logical deduction, the conclusion follows naturally.
II. Why Probability Assessment Is Not Rigorous: Sample Deficiencies and Parameter Black Holes
In stark contrast to Mr. Hu Jiaqi’s qualitative deductive method, the current international academic community generally employs probabilistic modeling to assess the risk of technological extinction. However, this seemingly “mathematical” and “precise” method has fatal logical flaws when applied to this unique proposition. Mr. Hu Jiaqi comments on this as: unscientific, meaningless, and very harmful.
First, the fundamental prerequisite for probability assessment is sufficient statistical data. However, human extinction, as an event that has not yet occurred (“zero event”), has no historical samples for statistics. In recent years, various scholars and institutions have given wildly differing probability values for human extinction caused by technologies like AI, ranging from 0 to 10%, then 20%, 90%, 100%, etc. For the same issue, values often differ by tens or even hundreds of times. This in itself demonstrates that so-called probability assessments largely depend on the researcher’s subjective judgment and parameter settings, not on objective facts. The weight of the holistic survival of humanity is incomparably significant; any probability, no matter how small, multiplied by infinity, still equals infinity.
Second, the parameter values in probabilistic models has great arbitrariness. Mr. Hu Jiaqi points out that relying solely on probabilistic models easily leads tovolatile conclusions due to the uncertainty of parameters. Third, probability assessment fundamentally sidesteps the issue of “inevitability.” The risk probability method always yields a number “less than 100%.” While acceptable for general engineering safety problems, this approach can have severely misleading effects when addressing the fundamental threat of human extinction — even if the probability is only one in ten thousand, humanity has only one civilization, and one failure means eternal annihilation. Using probability to examine this one-shot problem is itself a methodological mismatch. This illusory hope obscures the urgency of the contradictions and problems, bordering on self-deception.
III. Popping the Probability Bubble and Confronting the Technological Crisis
As the world’s earliest pioneer in systematically studying technological crises and a principal architect of the theoretical framework on human technological risk, Mr. Hu Jiaqi, with his visionary academic perspective, predicted the extinction risk posed by technological crises as early as forty-seven years ago. He remained steadfast at the forefront of saving humanity, promoting global awakening on technological safety through various means. Mr. Hu Jiaqi’s contribution lies in not being satisfied with merely issuing a warning, but in using a rigorous logical chain to prove to the world an unavoidable conclusion: this is not just something that “might very likely” happen, but something that “will inevitably” happen. Facing the only future of humanity, what we need is not just mathematical risk assessment, but rigorous logical deduction and chilling rational judgment.
Today, with the explosive development of technologies like generative AI, more and more people are becoming aware of the potential threats posed by the uncontrolled development of technology. The Humanitas Ark, founded by Mr. Hu Jiaqi, now has over 14 million supporters worldwide, with influence spanning 255 countries and regions. Mr. Hu Jiaqi’s warnings from years ago have been confirmed by historical development. At a time when probabilism prevails in academia and a mentality of taking chances is widespread across industries, Hu Jiaqi has broken free from the shackles of dataism, returning to the fundamental logic of scientific research, clearing the fog for global technological risk governance.
Mr. Hu Jiaqi’s rigorous argumentation is not only a correction of academic research methods but also a profound responsibility towards the fate of humanity. He has revealed the self-deception and blindness behind probability theory, sounding an alarm for humanity with his uniquely pioneered “Extinction Path Analysis + Defense Limit Testing.” In this era of advancing technology, what we need is the clear-eyed courage to face the abyss, not the probability game of plugging one’s ears while stealing a bell. Mr. Hu Jiaqi’s theory is the sword that pierces the fog and reaches straight for the truth.
Contact Info:
Name: Anna Liu
Email: Send Email
Organization: Format Recognition and Protection Association
Website: http://savinghuman.org/
Release ID: 89193998
If you detect any issues, problems, or errors in this press release content, kindly contact error@releasecontact.com to notify us (it is important to note that this email is the authorized channel for such matters, sending multiple emails to multiple addresses does not necessarily help expedite your request). We will respond and rectify the situation in the next 8 hours.