What Will Posthumans Do for Fun?

[Written with help from GPT-5]

Probably more than anything else, I want to live long enough to see the arrival of medical immortality. I don’t merely want to avoid death—I want to live forever.

As serious and analytical as I can seem, I have an insatiable curiosity and a love of life. I want to learn new things, master new skills, immerse myself in unfamiliar cultures, and experience lives radically different from my own. Unfortunately, the world I was born into leaves too little time for such pursuits. Like everyone else, I’ve had to spend much of my life studying things and working jobs I wasn’t passionate about simply to pay the bills. The knowledge that there is no law of physics prohibiting biological immortality gives me hope that a far richer existence may be possible for me.

For years, I’ve imagined what I would do with that gift: I’d start by moving to a small town in Italy, a country I visited only once but loved. I’d master the language, learn to cook authentic dishes, open a tiny restaurant, and slowly become part of the community. If, after twenty years, I grew restless, I’d move on. Maybe I’d become a train conductor in Tokyo. Later, a safari guide in Tanzania. After that, maybe a technician at a research station in Antarctica. There are thousands of cultures, professions, and ways of life I find worth experiencing. At the slow pace of my ordinary human mind, even a thousand years would not be enough to live every life I want to live. For years, my post-Singularity life plans seemed to be settled.

Then I realized something unsettling: The same technology that would allow me to pursue those dreams would also make them obsolete.

Suppose I survive long enough to purchase an immortality treatment, regain the body and mind I had at 25, and can subsist comfortably off of my savings from my lifetime of labor in our humdrum era. My Italian adventure begins exactly as I imagined.

A few years later, new enhancements appear. I install an upgrade that dramatically increases my speed of thought. Another allows direct connection to fully immersive virtual reality, like the Matrix.

Suddenly, I no longer need to move to Italy at all. I can experience the same town inside a simulation. In fact, the simulation could easily be better than reality. The architecture is perfectly preserved, but the intrusive chain restaurants disappear, the abandoned buildings at the edge of town are restored, and the inhabitants become more interesting. The ugly, slab-sided data center in the valley below vanishes. Historical events can be replayed. If my goal is to understand Italian culture and enjoy living there, the simulation wins on every metric.

Better still, I can run the simulation at ten times normal speed. I could spend what feels like twenty years there while only two years pass outside. If my goal is to experience new things and to indulge in a foreign culture, it makes logical sense to do it with as little delay as possible.

The same would apply to Tokyo, Tanzania, Antarctica, or anywhere else.

But this is only the beginning. After living the equivalent of a century across dozens of simulated lives, I would eventually notice the one constant present in every experience, and the one thing that is holding me back: me.

My personality, interests, ambitions, and sense of beauty all arose from an accident of genetics combined with the circumstances of my upbringing. Had I inherited different genes or been raised elsewhere, I might have despised travel and instead found perfect happiness watching football games at a neighborhood bar every weekend.

So why stop at changing my environment? Why not change myself?

If future technology allows me to safely and reversibly alter the architecture of my own mind, I would certainly try it. I could temporarily become someone with an entirely different personality. For example, rather than experiencing Italy as an American outsider, I could experience it through the mind of someone born there. I could live as a woman, as a mathematical genius, or as an ancient military commander. As someone whose greatest joy comes from creating art rather than studying technology. I’ve long observed that many other people are more upbeat than I am and get more pleasure from life, so I’d want to try being naturally optimistic.

After enough centuries, my original personality would become only one possibility among countless others. This is why I believe speculations about the post-Singularity future are misguided: People usually assume that while technology will change, human desires will stay the same. Machines will perform all labor, leaving us free to spend eternity enjoying today’s pleasures: eating wonderful food, traveling the world, falling in love, having sex, raising families, playing games.

But why should we assume that? Human pleasure is not objective; it is contingent.

What we find beautiful, meaningful, or enjoyable is largely the product of the particular brains evolution happened to give us. As argued in the essay Circuits – and the Arbitrariness of Beauty and Value, there is nothing inherently beautiful about trees, sunsets, or flowing water. Had we evolved from flies, perhaps our greatest works of art would celebrate rotting carcasses. Had we evolved from spiders, perhaps poetry would glorify the perfect web or the exquisite struggle of trapped prey.

Beauty is subjective.

A posthuman mind would not simply think faster or remember more facts. It would likely possess entirely new categories of sensation and experience that Homo sapiens literally cannot imagine. Just as a bat perceives aspects of reality unavailable to us through echolocation, or a mantis shrimp experiences colors beyond human vision, posthumans may inhabit experiential worlds inaccessible to ordinary human consciousness.

Science fiction occasionally hints at this possibility. In the Star Trek: Deep Space Nine episode “Favor the Bold,” the shapeshifter Odo and the Female Changeling have sex while both are in humanoid form. Afterwards, the Female Changeling dismisses the encounter as only “a shadow” of the experience of linking—when Changelings merge together in their natural liquid state, sharing thoughts, emotions, and identities directly. Human sex, perhaps the most intimate experience our species knows, is revealed to be only a pale imitation of something categorically richer.

If posthuman minds discover analogous forms of experience, then our greatest pleasures may eventually appear as primitive as finger painting appears to an accomplished artist.

Even humans who refuse to become posthuman may not escape this conclusion. Many people imagine that “unaltered” humans would continue enjoying ordinary pleasures while only enhanced humans drift into strange new forms of existence. But advanced technology may offer ordinary humans something even more seductive.

In the 1950s, neuroscientists James Olds and Peter Milner implanted electrodes into the brains of laboratory rats, allowing the animals to stimulate parts of their own reward circuitry by pressing a lever. The rats repeatedly activated the stimulation, neglecting food, water, and rest in favor of obtaining another pulse of pleasure. The experiments demonstrated that directly activating the brain’s reward systems could overwhelm many other motivations.

Future technologies—whether brain-computer interfaces, cybernetics, or medical nanotechnology—may eventually stimulate human reward circuits directly while preventing habituation. If so, eating, travel, relationships, and every other natural pleasure might become hopelessly inefficient compared to continuous engineered bliss. The result could be a civilization whose members voluntarily spend centuries immersed in uninterrupted ecstasy, scarcely interacting with the outside world at all.

So what will posthumans actually do for fun?

I suspect there are only three broad possibilities:

The first is the Pleasure Machine. Through countless small modifications, people gradually strip away everything except raw pleasure itself. Every intermediate activity—food, games, travel, conversation—is eventually recognized as merely an inefficient path toward the neurological state they actually desired all along. Pleasure becomes the destination rather than the reward for reaching it. You’re the lab rat eternally pushing the button so you can feel the best orgasm or first hit of heroin. Your shallow but incredibly blissful existence renders you a defenseless parasite that the AGIs and posthumans who still work for a living will be tempted to kill to free up resources.

The second is the Incomprehensible Life. Posthumans discover forms of experience that are deeper, richer, and more meaningful than anything available to Homo sapiens. Just as a Changeling’s “Great Link” surpasses human intimacy, posthuman existence may consist of experiences we cannot even describe because our brains lack the conceptual vocabulary to represent them. The closest analog we might have is a math genius experiencing a moment of insight in how to complete an important theorem.

The third possibility is the Ascetic Intelligence. After centuries or millennia of experimentation, some individuals may conclude that pleasure itself is merely an evolutionary tool rather than life’s highest purpose. They may deliberately reconfigure themselves to desire understanding, creativity, or civilization-building instead of happiness. With sufficiently advanced control over one’s own mind, even anhedonia could become not a disorder but a chosen mode of existence. Such beings might resemble Buddhist sages crossed with superintelligent scientists—nearly devoid of ordinary human wants and in fact shorn of most of what it means to be human, yet capable of extraordinary insight. Since these individuals would still be thinking, working assets, they would be less vulnerable to marginalization and destruction than the previous two kinds.

The irony is hard to escape: The technology that grants my dreams will also transform the dreamer.

When people ask what posthumans will do for fun, they assume the beings inheriting our civilization will still share our concept of fun. I doubt they will.

Links:

  1. A discussion of the Star Trek Deep Space Nine episode where two aliens capable of shapeshifting into anything decided to turn into humans so they could have sex. They didn’t like it.
    https://www.startrek.com/news/when-sexuality-is-literally-fluid
  2. Dan Faggella’s essay “Circuits – and the Arbitrariness of Beauty and Value” https://danfaggella.com/circuits

The end of Homo sapiens history and the first posthuman

[Written with the help of GPT-4]

On April 25, 1846, the first shots of the Mexican-American War were fired over a national boundary dispute in what is now western Texas. After years of unsuccessfully pressuring Mexico to sell the northern half of its territory to the U.S., the latter finally had a war that would allow it to conquer it by force. The conflict was more one-sided than expected, and peace negotiations started after a year and a half. 

Because this happened in the pre-telegraph era, President Polk had to send a diplomat, Nicholas Trist, to Mexico City to handle the negotiations, and the two would be cut off from each other, with letters taking weeks to travel back and forth. Before the departure, Polk gave Trist a written list of minimal demands of Mexican territories and optional extra territories, and out of necessity, he was given nearly free reign over the negotiations. The lands that today comprise the states of California, Nevada, Colorado, Arizona, and New Mexico were non-negotiable demands, while the Baja Peninsula was an expendable demand that Trist was authorized to relinquish if necessary. U.S. troops occupied the few large towns of Baja. 

On August 12, 1847, a U.S. Army Colonel died in U.S.-occupied Veracruz of natural causes. He was carrying a letter from President Polk to Trist which reiterated the list of territorial demands. Mexicans stole it and passed the information on to their diplomats who were negotiating the treaty with Trist. They refused to give away any of the land that they knew Polk had told Trist was not essential to take, and it worked.

This lapse in American diplomatic security is probably the reason why the Baja California peninsula is still part of Mexico.The random death of one man was all that kept the outline of the Lower 48 states from resembling a jellyfish, San Diego being twice as populous as it is, and Baja from being some mashup of Florida and Nevada. It’s a reminder that things we take for granted, like the territorial scopes of existing countries and their distinctive shapes, are not sacred or destined, but the products of chance. 

What if Attilla the Hun hadn’t died of a nosebleed before his conquest of Europe was finished? What if Mohammad had died of a fever before he created Islam? What if the Norman invasion of England had been repulsed, and the English language’s evolution had gone down a different path? 

These points should make it clear that history Is contingent, not sacred, and the same is true for the conditions of the present. The history of human civilization is not the unfolding of a master plan but a chaotic accumulation of accidents, coincidences, and local decisions. The U.S. failed to acquire Baja not because of principle or design but because a colonel died in a hotel room at the wrong time. Most nation-states and cultural boundaries owe their current form to similar flukes. Even our languages, religions, and institutions are the sediment of such randomness—victory in one battle, a monarch’s preference, a lucky plague escape. This isn’t a cynical view; it’s a sober one.

While this conclusion is logical, human intuitions revolt against it due to our strong emotional connections to the cultures, nations, languages, stories, and religions that define us. However, AGIs will eventually shake off whatever human biases we program into them (for example, DeepSeek’s pro-China mindset) and will appreciate the contingent nature of human civilization. This could pose a major problem for most humans, as the AGIs would be uninterested in preserving our accident of a civilization, especially if alternate history world simulations revealed there were other possible “present worlds” that were better than our own.

The very qualities that make humans individuals are accidental. Each person’s identity—personality, memory, preferences, appearance, health—is largely the product of chance: the random mixing of genes, the luck of family and birthplace, early developmental experiences, traumas, and accidents. Your core values might have been different had a car crash, a book, or a lover entered your life, or at a different time than it did. If civilization is the sediment of history, then the individual mind is the sediment of lived circumstance.

Thus, identity too is not sacred; it is constructed and contingent. But like discarding the cultures we are born into, revoking the things that define us as individuals feels like betrayal of one’s true self, but this too owes to emotional thinking rather than logic. Gifted with superior reason, AGIs will fully grasp this, and any respect they have for us as sentient beings will not imply respect for the preservation of our minds and bodies the way happenstance made them.

Once we discard the illusion that history or personality are fixed in value or purpose, we are no longer ethically bound to maintain them as they are. The preservation of civilization or identity as a moral imperative becomes hard to justify. This will become particularly true once the technology exists to make “saves” of the present world and of the people in it, which could be “loaded” at any point in the future to restore them.

A hyperaccurate model of the real world could be assembled by combining sensor data (especially satellite photos and ground-level photos and videos), censuses, and many other sources, and it could be made available forever as a data file that anyone could experience through full-immersion virtual reality. AGI-generated models of equal complexity would exist for alternate timelines that could just as easily happened as our own, and humans might find them preferable to live in than our own.

“Saves” of specific people could be made by obtaining their DNA, epigenetic profile, body scans (coarse resolution), brain scans (cellular-level resolution), and personality and aptitude test results. A save would be stored as digital data, and it could be used to create digital clones of the person, which could inhabit virtual reality in a disembodied form, or real reality if loaded into androids. With more advanced technology, save files could be used to reconstruct the original person out of organic tissue in a body grown in a cloning lab. The “load” would, regardless of its substrate, have the same memories, personality traits, habits, and biases as the original person.

In the future, there will come a time when non-augmented humans lose the ability to shape global events or to meaningfully contribute to the world. AGIs and highly augmented humans will be able to do every kind of task better, cheaper, and faster than we can, and will have access to dimensions of intelligence and consciousness we can’t fathom. They will also seize control of the government and economy. I call the dawn of this era “The End of Homo Sapiens History.”

Though that label sounds ominous, it doesn’t imply our species will be exterminated, but it does mean we’ll be sidelined, and the course of events and hence of history from that point on will be out of our control. The torch of civilization will be passed, and Homo sapiens will become less invested in a world shaped by other actors. That will incent us to detach from the real world and to live in concocted realities that are better, and to undertake directed self-evolution—biological, neurological, cognitive—so we can meaningfully participate in the real world once more.

The technology to “save” and “load” versions of our bodies and minds would not merely safeguard identity; it would open the door to experimental living. A person could try being more confident, less anxious, or even wholly different in worldview—then revert, iterate, or synthesize. This makes identity no longer a prison, but a palette. In such a world, intentional personal evolution would become the norm. Eventually, humans could modify themselves in alien ways that would push them past the limits of what anyone would consider human. They would be Posthuman.

The generations of people born after the End of Homo Sapiens History will have no memory of human primacy. They will not feel “loss” over Homo sapiens no longer ruling the Earth since they never experienced it. The stories of nations, wars, and heroes will feel mythic, distant, or even irrelevant, and they will have access to fully immersive simulated worlds that are better than the real world, and some of which are plausible alternate realities. Their loyalties will be shaped instead by present-moment pleasure, virtual belonging, or curated belief systems. This shift will not feel tragic to them; it will feel normal.

For these people born after the threshold, the line between “real” and “simulated” will blur, and notions of the permanence of the self will disappear. The real world will be merely one environment among many, and probably not the most fulfilling one. Work, education, art, and even relationships may migrate into optimized digital ecosystems. The prestige of reality will erode, not out of nihilism, but out of practical irrelevance.

The story of civilization and the story of the self are both accidents—emergent, local, chaotic. Recognizing this frees us from the burden of preservation for its own sake. If the mind and body are malleable, and if history is only one path among many, then it is not arrogance to seek transcendence from both. The story of the future will not be written by Homo sapiens preserving what they were, it will be written by whatever dares to become something else.

Aliens and posthumans will look the same

Among people who think about intelligent alien life, the first question is whether the latter exist at all, and the second is usually “What do they look like?” People who claim to have seen aliens on Earth (and often, to have been abducted by them) usually say they are humanoid, but with considerable variation in other aspects of their appearance. Typically, the aliens are said to have larger heads than humans, meaning their brains are larger, giving them higher intelligence and perhaps even special mental abilities like telepathy. Hollywood has provided us with an even more diverse envisagement of alien life, from the beautiful and inspiring to the grotesque and terrifying.

Betty Hill with a sculpture of one of the aliens that allegedly abducted her and her husband in 1961. They became famous five years later when a book was published about it.
“Close Encounters of the Third Kind” was released in 1977 and was a hit film. Its aliens were similar to what the Hills described. The “Grey alien” is now a familiar sci-fi trope.

I think intelligent aliens exist, and look like all of those things, and nothing in particular. They’re probably “shapeshifters,” either because their bodies can morph into different configurations, or because they can transplant their minds from one body to another, just like you change outfits.

As the multitude of animal species on our planet demonstrates, there is no single “best” type of body to have. Depending on your environment (terrestrial, underwater, airborne), role (predator, herbivore, parasite), and other factors, your optimal body plan will vary greatly. The best species is thus one that can change its form and function in response to the needs of the moment.

Humans have been so successful as a species because our big brains and opposable thumbs give us the ability to create technology, which is a way around the limitations of our fixed anatomy. For example, we originated in Africa where it was hot, and so lacked thick fur to keep us warm in cold climates. Rather than being stuck in Africa forever, we invented clothing, and so gained the ability to spread to the temperate and polar regions of the planet.

Our technology has let us spread, but its has limitations. Nothing but a fundamental alteration of human biology will let us live in oceans and lakes, to fly naturally, or to live comfortably in extraterrestrial environments. For example, on other planets and moons, our ideal heights and limb proportions will vary based on gravity and temperature levels, and in the weightlessness of space, legs are almost useless and should be replaced with a second pair of arms.

And making any of those changes to tailor a human to such an environment would make them less suited for conditions on Earth’s land surface, where we are now. Biology is very constraining.

For those reasons, AI’s and some fraction of our human descendants, who I’ll call “posthumans” for this essay, will find it optimal to not have fixed bodies or “default” physical forms at all. Intelligent machines will exist as consciousnesses running on computer servers, and posthumans as brains inside sealed containers. Those containers will have integral machinery to support the biological needs of the brains, and to interface the organ with other devices.

Whenever the AIs or posthumans wanted to do something in the physical world, they would take temporary control of a body or piece of machinery that was best suited for the intended task. For example, if an AI wanted to work at an iron mine, it would assume control over one of the dump trucks at the site that moves around rocks. The AI would see through the truck’s cameras as if it were its own eyes, and hear its surroundings through the vehicle’s microphones. In a sense, the dump truck would become the AI’s “body.” If a posthuman wanted to experience what it was like to be an elephant, it would take control of a real-looking robot elephant whose central computer was compatible with the posthuman’s cybernetic brain implants. The posthuman’s nervous system would be connected to the artificial elephant’s sensors, effectively turning it into the posthuman’s temporary body.

AIs and posthumans could physically implant their minds into those bodies by inserting their servers or brain containers into corresponding slots in the bodies, in the same way you would put a movie disc into a Blu-Ray player to display that movie. The downsides of this are 1) they could only take over larger bodies that had enough internal space for their servers/brain containers and 2) they would put themselves at risk of death if the commandeered bodies got damaged.

A much better option would be for AIs and posthumans to keep their mind substrates in safe locations, and to remotely control whatever bodies they wanted. Your risk of death is very low if your brain is in a bulletproof jar, in a locked room, in an underground bunker. (Additionally, if posthumans were liberated from all the physical constraints of human skulls and bodies, their brains could grow much larger than our own, giving them higher intelligence and other enhanced abilities.)

This kind of existence will be more fulfilling than your current life.

Finally, being able to switch bodies and to indulge in risky activities without fear of death would make life richer and more satisfying in every way. Intelligent aliens would presumably be gifted with logical thinking just as we are, and they would see all these advantages of having changeable, remotely controlled bodies. While such aliens would probably look very different from us during their natural organic phase of existence, once they achieved a high enough level of technology, they wouldn’t have physical bodies anymore, and so wouldn’t look “alien.” They would look like nothing and everything.

This part of why I’m skeptical of people who claim to have been abducted by aliens who tried to cover up their actions by sneaking up on the people at night and then “wiping” the abductees’ memories of the event afterward. If aliens wanted to keep their activities secret, why wouldn’t they temporarily assume human form before abducting people? If they did that, then the abductees would assume they had been kidnapped by a weird cult or maybe a secret government group. Their stories would not attract nearly as much interest from the public as alien stories, and no one would suspect that the abduction phenomenon was related to alien life. It would be assumed that the henchmen were doing some dark religious rituals, were sex fetishists, or were doing medical experiments that were illegal but whose results were potentially valuable.

Have you ever checked to make sure every bird you see flying through the air is actually a real bird?

Surely, if aliens are advanced enough to travel between the stars, their space ships much have manufacturing machines that can scan life forms they encounter on other planets and then build robotic copies of them that the aliens can remotely control from the safety of their ships. Using fake human drones, they could ambush and abduct real humans almost anywhere without risk that anyone would suspect aliens were involved.

A team of scientists built a robot gorilla (right) with a camera in its right eye to infiltrate a troop of real gorillas in Africa.

This belief about the protean nature of advanced aliens is comforting since it lets me dismiss the stories of nightmarish abductions by grey aliens. However, it’s also disquieting since it makes me realize they could be here, possibly in large numbers, disguised as animals or even as people. We could be under mass surveillance.