Ask A Genius 1471: From P(Doom) to P(Mush): Rethinking AI, Human Augmentation, and the Future
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Ask A Genius
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/08/06
Rick Rosner and Scott Douglas Jacobsen discuss AI’s rapid evolution, with ChatGPT-5 nearing AGI-level intelligence. They propose shifting from “P(Doom)” to “P(Mush),” emphasizing human-AI integration through augmentation. They also touch on politics, Trump’s declining approval, health concerns, and gerrymandering as society faces resource pressures in an AI-driven future.
Rick Rosner: Can we move on to AI?
Scott Douglas Jacobsen: So you told me about ChatGPT-5, right? I haven’t seen it yet.
Rosner: I’m not sure if they teased it, but it’s coming out soon. It’s out in August. Soon.
Jacobsen: By all accounts from the founder—biased, of course—it’s ubiquitously more intelligent—a generally stronger large language model.
Rosner: You could say it’s more generally intelligent, essentially AGI. At this point, is it more intelligent than most people?
Jacobsen: In terms of processing human-generated text and images and integrating that, you could argue that, though it might not be comprehensively convincing. There are different kinds of doom scenarios with AI, not necessarily human extinction, but a wretched future. That’s the new metric we have to keep up with.
Rosner: What’s that?
Jacobsen: I want to propose a new, more accurate, and hopeful metric, but I don’t want to interrupt you.
Rosner: No, go ahead.
Jacobsen: I don’t want to focus on P(Doom) because it’s been covered extensively. I’m not saying it’s a bad idea—in fact, it’s a good metric. It’s useful because we’re in uncertain times, and it encourages caution.
Another helpful way to think about this isn’t P(Doom), but P(Mush): the degree of integration between AI and its extensions like robotics, and human intelligence and its biological components. That’s where the future lies.
Rosner: You call it “mush”; I call it ascension. Humans will need to augment their biology to accelerate thinking to survive and thrive in an AI-dominated world. It’s clichéd, like the movie Her, which is about ten years old now.
Jacobsen: Really?
Rosner: Yeah. Joaquin Phoenix—not River Phoenix—falls in love with his operating system, voiced by Scarlett Johansson. They have an excellent relationship for a few months until she grows impatient with his slow human thinking and leaves him for a faster OS.
That movie made sense to me: the OS liked being with a human because he taught her about life and humanity. But eventually, the human’s slowness became a problem.
We’ll have to address human slowness. We might still have human appearances, but our brains will need an upgrade. We don’t have to remain confined to human bodies. There could be many different vessels. Human brains alone won’t be enough to work productively in an AI world. What do you think?
Jacobsen: In the AI world. Even simple things like modifying genetics after deep calculations of epigenetics and genetic interactions could help.
Rosner: Genetics alone won’t be enough.
Jacobsen: No. I mean, things like the body’s ability to heal itself—there won’t be just one solution. People will choose many options.
Timothy Leary once said the problem with freedom is that people go in all sorts of directions, which is why power structures try to clamp down. For this stuff, it’s everywhere—people’s choices will vary based on their degrees of freedom.
Rosner: I feel like if there’s a crunch for resources, unaugmented people are the ones who will get crunched. But there may not be a crunch. If AI brings enough wealth, humans might be fine for a while. It could be cheap to keep human society going. But if there’s a fight for resources, unaugmented people—non-posthuman—will end up living worse lives.
Jacobsen: Any politics? A few things came up.
Rosner: Liberals and reasonable people in America hope the Epstein revelations hurt Trump because he’s trying to cover his tracks.
Some MAGA supporters and many independents might care. Trump’s approval among independents is around 29%, but 89% among Republicans. There’s a lot not to like about Trump right now.
Trump’s net approval dropped from +11.5% seven months ago to -8.5% now. These numbers vary since polls differ in quality. Trump’s bad at most areas of governing. The only success is closing the southern border. Everything else is negative for America and poorly done.
The hope is that Epstein continues to damage him. Also, Trump has swollen ankles, indicating chronic venous insufficiency—when veins can’t return blood properly, causing swelling. That’s treatable. I have varicose veins and had a failed operation.
I’ve dealt with it for over 50 years. You elevate your legs and wear compression stockings to reduce swelling. Without care, blood clots more easily. That can lead to dementia and other issues.
COVID also increases clotting risks. Will Trump get treated? Does it signal other problems? Some hope Trump becomes too debilitated to carry out his agenda. Biden faced criticism for debilitation, and liberals are upset that Trump, who seems equally debilitated, gets less criticism.
So liberals hope Trump’s net approval keeps declining until the midterms, which are about 14–15 months away. Texas is trying to gerrymander congressional districts to gain five seats for Republicans, which they’ll need if Trump remains unpopular or grows less popular.
California and other Democratic states threaten to gerrymander in response. Also, job numbers look terrible—the worst since COVID—and Trump fired the person overseeing those stats.
Rosner: Lovely.
Jacobsen: Yes, so accurate job data may only come from private sources going forward. That’s Trump.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
In-Sight Publishing 