Last month I posted a review of “Generation AI and the Transformation of Human Being” by Gregory Stock, published on December 15, 2025.
My short review blurb, which appears in the book, reads: “This is a great book: a page-turner packed with thoughtful and insightful observations on the present and future of AI and inspired by a refreshingly optimistic view of human and AI evolution. Generation AI is a much better conceptual guide to our AI-enabled future than the more cautious, precautionary, or even scary treatments of AI that have become fashionable.”
Stock will appear in two forthcoming episodes of the Mindplex podcast. One will be hosted by Mihaela Ulieru and will feature an extended debate between him and Roman Yampolskiy, a strong “AI Doomer,” who wants to slow or stop AI’s advance towards ASI. Another will be hosted by me and focused on the last part of my review “Generation AI and the common future of biology an”d technology: A review of ‘Generation AI and the Transformation of Human Being,’ by Gregory Stock, with commentary,” subheaded “The rise of Metaman.”
Stock’s questions to YOU
Together with the book, Stock has released a web app for readers to answer questions marked with QR codes in the text, get a sense of how other readers are answering the same questions, and contribute to AI-powered sentiment analysis. To access the web app, you can follow the QR codes embedded in the book or access it directly via app.onlyhuman.us.
You can participate in the questionnaire even if you haven’t read “Generation AI,” but I recommend that you read the book first, as it could make you change or at least reconsider your answers.
Answering Stock’s question is a fascinating exercise that will force you to think deeply about AI and its intertwining with individuals and societies. For example, one of the questions reads: “Would you want your own personal sexbot devoted to your sexual and emotional gratification? If so, what do you think might be the consequences?” I guess many readers will be tempted to answer yes to the first part of the question, but reconsider their answer after reflecting on the second part.
Besides forcing readers to think hard, the questionnaire could be a valuable tool for aggregating responses and analyzing the public perception of AI and its impact on our world. Public sentiment is likely to change with time, and this tool could help systematically quantify and analyze it. Of course, this can only happen if many (I mean seriously many) people answer the questions. Therefore, I wish to encourage Mindplex readers to participate in the survey.
“Questioning is a powerful vehicle for better understanding ourselves and others,” Stock says to Mindplex readers. “My team and I (see onlyhuman.us) just launched a project to enable people everywhere to respond to open-ended, value-laden questions; compare themselves to others; and interact directly with those who see things differently. At this point, our only-human app is in English and allows you to demographically partition and explore the answer space. In late February onlyhuman will be available in 25 languages. In March it will algorithmically match users for 1-on-1 chats with RT translation. Please join our Human Identity Project by answering the app’s questions - It’s free! - about what you think about the immersive AI world we’re heading towards. This is a work-in-progress, so If you have suggestions or want to help, reach out to me directly ([email protected]).
“My debate with Yampolskiy is based on the first question in the app,” Stock continues. “Are you more worried that AI might gain control over humanity and destroy us, or that we might use AI’s power in deeply destructive ways? I think humans wielding potent AI-derived powers will embody the deepest immediate challenges for us, but our path to abundance could be relatively short if we push through the bumpy transition as fast as we can. Yampolskiy thinks ASI will exterminate humanity and we need to slam on the brakes! What do you think and why?”
To add my own encouragement to contribute to Stock’s, here are five questions that I found especially interesting, with my answers.
5 interesting questions and my answers
Question 25 (Out of the Nest): If we knew that all humans would suddenly expire 50 years from today, and humanity singlemindedly embraced the vision of leaving a legacy - a self-sustaining, AI consciousness that could survive indefinitely on its own - do you think we could pull it off?
My answer: Probably yes. The current consensus is that today’s AIs are not conscious (though some experts argue that they already have some kind of weird consciousness, very different from ours). But I think fully conscious AIs could exist 50 years from now. To qualify as our successors, future AI should have human-like consciousness, but I think this is achievable in 50 years as well.
Question 26 (Upload): If you knew you could be cryopreserved at death and have a real chance of being reborn in cyberspace two centuries later, would you sign up?
My answer: In principle, yes, but it would depend on how much it costs. To me, $1K is disposable but $100K is essential for the financial stability and well-being of my family. So I would sign up if it costs $1K but not if it costs $100K. Of course, if I can't afford it I would keep searching for cheaper alternatives.
Question 34 (Alien Message): If a billion-year-old monolith engraved with strange writing were found on Mars, how much would it affect your view of humanity, and in what ways?
My answer: Not much. The discovery of the old monolith would be perfectly compatible with my current view of humanity as one of many intelligent civilizations in the vast cosmos, and so my view of humanity wouldn’t change. However, I would want to know everything about the monolith and what the strange writing says.
Question 35 (Rooted in Place): If you knew the cosmos was filled with intelligent life, but that humanity might never meaningfully contact it because of the vastness of the universe, how would it affect you?
My answer: Actually, I would refuse to accept this conclusion and do my best to contribute to the possibility of future meaningful contact. I guess I would be one of those “mad scientists” who try to establish the theory of faster-than-light interstellar travel or build a warp drive in the garage. This would be much better than surrendering to despair.
Question 36 (AI Fears): Are you more worried that AI might gain control over humanity and destroy us, or that we might use AI’s power in deeply destructive ways? Why?
My answer: I think AI is still far from the ability to “gain control over humanity and destroy us.” But the possibility that “we might use AI’s power in deeply destructive ways” is very real and imminent. Therefore, at this moment the latter possibility worries me much more. For the longer term, I think conscious artificial intelligence will be part of humanity.
And here are a few others from the book. You can see more there or in the app.
Question 10 (AI Therapist): Would you rather engage a human therapist or an AI therapist, assuming both would have similar effectiveness helping you?
Question 19 (Phone or Hand): If you had to permanently give up access to all phones, computers, and telecommunications, or amputate one of your hands, which would you choose?
Question 28 (Legacy: If you created a convincing simulation of yourself, who do you think would want to keep it in their lives as a friend if you died?