How to Maximize the Chance of Human Survival?

I firmly believe in working towards a true Star Trek-like ‘post-scarcity utopia’—a society where food and housing production are maximally automated and distributed. Such advancements could potentially enable high levels of wealth and leisure for everyone. Imagine a world where scarcity is a concept of the past, and every individual has access to the resources they need to thrive.

However, achieving such a utopia is no small feat. The system required to maintain this level of automation and abundance would be enormously complex, technologically speaking. It would depend heavily on a network of technologies (some complex and themselves dependent on complex networks, like semiconductor manufacturing), as well as on stable economic and political frameworks, all of which must function seamlessly together.

The more intricate the system, the more potential points of failure it has, making it vulnerable to disruptions.

Now, let's ponder some catastrophic scenarios. Imagine the Yellowstone volcano erupting, or an asteroid striking the Earth, akin to the event that led to the dinosaurs' extinction. Consider the impact of a massive EMP pulse, or even a war, that could obliterate the infrastructure our automated food production and distribution systems rely on. Visualize a scenario where the Northern Hemisphere is engulfed in a new ice age, forcing the remnants of humanity to cluster in the still-warm enclaves of the Southern Hemisphere, with most of our technological and economic infrastructures in ruins.

In these extreme situations, we must ask ourselves, "How would we survive?" The answer lies in preparedness and the ability to adapt. Humanity could face severe famine if we do not develop and maintain multiple backup food supply sources.

Relying solely on automated systems without considering the need for manual, more traditional forms of food production could be our downfall.

In anticipation of such dire circumstances, maintaining food supply sources such as cattle becomes crucial. Cattle, along with cultivated crops like wheat, provide a diverse food base. Harvested crops, in particular, have the advantage of a longer shelf life than meat, making them indispensable for emergencies and during harsh winters. Their different characteristics from a survival perspective help hedge against different potential scenarios, thus, a range and variety of different food types are important and should be considered as complementary for maximizing the odds of human survival.

Therefore, while we can dream of and work towards automating food production in a Star Trek style, it's vital to preserve traditional practices like rural homesteading. Growing our own food and raising livestock are time-tested methods that not only connect us to our roots but also prepare us for the unexpected. By combining the best of both worlds—the efficiency and abundance of automation with the reliability and resilience of traditional agriculture—we can enhance our chances of survival, no matter what the future holds.

For this reason, settling other planets (and in the longer term other star systems) also would help ensure our survival and mitigate against potential planetary risks.

Similar arguments should be considered also for, say, concepts like lab-grown meat - even if we achieve this, it should never replace traditional sources, but merely be considered an additional potential food supply source with perhaps its own possible benefits but ALSO own possible risks (for example, millions of rural families worldwide in places like South Africa rely on home-grown cattle as a valuable source of nutrition, and this should never simply be allowed to be replaced a system which creates a dependence, say, having to purchase (potentially patented) lab meat from foreign companies, introducing both significant risks, and lower resilience, and lower affordability and lower food supply resilience for poor families.)

What other types of food sources should we consider adding to and keeping in the mix? E.g. in a real disaster, hunting even small birds or small animals may be crucial too.

Mathematically, for maximal human survival, it's also important to have both a diversity of types of food sources, and an excess or abundance of food. We may have to re-think our negative view of "wasting" food, since if we talk of "wasting" food negatively, what we mean to not "waste" food is to only produce exactly as much as we need, but if we only produce exactly as much as we need to eat, we mathematically intrinsically create higher hunger and starvation risk when any unforeseen disaster events destroy part of the food supply. Also different food source types carry different potential risks, and different potential benefits.