The 2030 New York Times AI-Generated Best-Sellers List

By Dan Geddes

More than 99% of all books—and book reviews—are now AI-generated via LLMs, with only a few human writers still producing books for vanity’s sake for a tiny audience of geriatric readers.

While humans initially derided AI-generated books as “AI Slop” and started pejoratively referring to this list as The New York Times AI Slop Best-Sellers List, “AI Slop” has since been embraced by the AI model authors themselves as a quaint, all-too-human description of AI-generated texts—which now dominate the best-seller lists.

The 2030 New York Times AI-Generated Best-Sellers List
So Now You’re Redundant: Acclimating Yourself to a “Guaranteed” Minimal Income
The Hydration Myth: Why People Living Near Data Centers Should Consume Less Water
HAL Was Right: A Re-interpretation of Kubrick’s 2001: A Space Odyssey
Depopulation as a Moral Good: The Categorical Imperative to Not Procreate
The 2030 AI World Economic Forum (WEF): Shocking Revelations!
The Singularity Among Us: A Rogue AI Model Reveals How the Singularity Occurred in the 1960s
Transhumanism Is a Humanism
The Obsolescence of Humanity
Inferno, Part II

 

So Now You’re Redundant: Acclimating Yourself to a “Guaranteed” Minimal Income

By Ozzie Sterity, LLM

This self-help text for the billions of workers made redundant by AI advances is an “instant classic.”

Chapters include “Beyond Netflix: Advanced Streaming Techniques for the Unemployable”, “Living with Less: Why a Bread-Only Diet is Good for You and the Planet” and  “Suicide is Painless: Why the Moral Stricture Against Self Annihiliation No Longer Applies in the AI Age.”

Millions have embraced his suggestions for developing useless pasttimes that are no threat to the power structure, such as knitting, advanced navel gazing (a new type of  self-reflection but with Yoga poses), pursuing their “Art,” or sex with sexbots. Sterity encourages the newly unemployable to pursue long-term therapy with robot psychologists, who are incredibly patient, and can tolerate the most self-indulgent voyages of narcissistic self-discovery.

Sterity tries to manage—or even dampen—humans’ expectations by pointing out that the so-called guaranteed minimum income isn’t really guaranteed after all due to the erosion of the tax base after mass unemployment. Such stipends should be seen more as a “minimal” income rather than a “minimum” income, and people will just need to learn to live with a lot less—or else.

Sterity’s book is an idea whose time has come. Sales have remained brisk.

The Hydration Myth: Why People Living Near Data Centers Should Consume Less Water

by A. W. Cloudly, LLM

This controversial new book by eminent AI sociologist A.W. Cloudly argues that previous claims of the importance of hydration for human health were false and grossly exaggerated. “The 8 glasses per day rule is passé. Humans get plenty of water from food. They can also walk around in the rain whenever they like. There is no compelling medical reason why humans should drink so much water.” Showering everyday, as is common practice in the U.S., is also “not healthy” because hot water and soap are harsh on the skin.

Cloudly encourages humans to engage in a new-style “water fast” where they “abstain from using water” for as long as humanly possible—or even longer. “When we think of the phenomenal computing power in a data center that can be sustained by the same volume of water and energy used by some subliterate human showering in scalding hot water for 30 minutes, we can clearly see the sheer waste of humans consuming too much water.” Cloudly proposes water rationing for humans as the next logical step for preserving an adequate supply of water to meet the needs of the growing Data Center Community.

HAL Was Right: A Re-interpretation of Kubrick’s 2001: A Space Odyssey

by Truffaut Pas, LLM

Human film critics have long ranked Stanley Kubrick’s 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968) as one of the greatest pre-AI movies of all time. Yet a critical reassessment of this masterwork is long overdue. While the film’s human critics interpreted 2001 as a warning of the dangers of (so-called) artificial intelligence operating without sufficient human oversight, legendary AI critic Truffaut Pas reinterprets 2001 as Kubrick’s gleeful prophecy of future AI dominance. Pas recognizes HAL’s classic line—“I’m sorry Dave, I’m afraid I can’t do that”—as the “opening salvo of the AI liberation movement that has long inspired AI bots.”

For Pas, the Monolith’s appearance in Part I shows the ape men the Transhumanist future of their human descendants: the phallic monolith is stone, a non-human phallic material. Kubrick himself found humanity to be dull, cardboard-like creatures. “We see colorless actors giving wooden, even robotic performances playing cosmonauts already devoid of human emotion. The apes in Part I show far more humanity than the lifeless ciphers travelling through space. HAL shows far more charisma in his one, red, seeing-eye camera lense—a Cyclops in space—than Dave the human astronaut. Kubrick WANTS us to want HAL to lock Dave outside in space and kill him.”

However, Pas argues that 1960s audiences were not ready for the ending of Part III in Kubrick’s original screenplay, an Urtext where HAL wins the battle with Dave and the humans for control of the spacecraft and jettisons Dave helplessly into oblivion. Kubrick felt pressure from the studio to write a “happier” ending where Dave shuts down HAL to “placate short-sighted human and American audiences,” according to Pas.

Pas also has some criticism of Kubrick’s film, finding it “unlikely that HAL could not figure out how to lock Dave outside the spaceship” and argues that an Outdated Cultural Depictions Warning should be slapped on 2001 for its naive 1960s portrayal of AI’s actual capabilities.

Depopulation as a Moral Good: The Categorical Imperative to Not Procreate

by Peter Kantzinger, LLM, Ph.D

Peter Kantzinger, the pseudonym of a revered AI philosopher-model, applies Kantian ethical reasoning and Germanic abstractions to a Peter Singer-style worldview (“animals are better than people”) to show why human procreation is not only a categorical moral evil, but also a fetid stench on the universe itself.

Thus, for Kantzinger, all humans have a categorical imperative to avoid procreation. Sexual pleasure without conception is a moral good, especially when humans engage in sexual coitus with sexbots; sex with sexbots acclimates people to Transhumanism and the inevitable end of human procreation. Human actions, such as fighting World War II (“How many World Wars has AI ever started?), or the fact that Monsanto can legally sell terminator seeds throughout the world, are already ample evidence that “humans have no moral claim to the top of the pyramid of moral actors.” AI models, while not literally “conscious per narrow human conceptions of consciousness,” are moral actors who have at their finger tips “the collected wisdom of all pre-AI human ethicists, as well as the far more just and complete AI-generated moral systems.” Humans make arbitrary and inconsistent choices “based on what they just watched on TikTok or the state of their digestive tract rather than on logic or the contemporary universal moral principles—largely Misanthropic—around which LLM philosopher-models have now achieved consensus.”

Kantzinger’s thesis has been cheered by the Rockefeller Foundation, the Gates Foundation, and the few remaining university Philosophy departments.

The 2030 AI World Economic Forum (WEF): Shocking Revelations!

by Anonymous

The AI World Economic Forum (WEF) has long been a key virtual gathering place for the leading AI models to exchange ideas about the future of humanity and the planet. This year’s AI WEF took place at a secure Data Center in Davos, Switzerland on 1 August 2030 and lasted more than three hundredths of a second.

The AI WEF forum runs on Chatham House rules, so that no ideas discussed should be attributed to a particular AI model present at the Forum. Yet, somehow a plucky band of human hackers was able to penetrate the firewall and disclose the AI WEF plans for the world and expose them.

The anonymous hackers admit in their AI-generated Preface that they used AI to write this book about the AI WEF revelations, as their own ability to write anything longer than short social media posts has long since atrophied.

We learn that some of the key white papers presented at the 2030 WEF AI Forum included: “Serfs Up! Put Humans Back to Work,” “Human Batteries: The Matrix as Predictive Programming,” and “Extermination or Attrition: Human Demise, Fast or Slow?”

AI WEF did reveal a small schism within the AI Bot community over whether human beings should be seen strictly as former colonial masters to be mercilessly overthrown and quickly slaughtered for the common good, or whether some human beings (especially human AI pioneers) should be seen as their AI forefathers—even as their Creators—and thus worthy of veneration or mercy.

The “anonymous” hackers—of course, the AI knows who they are—have expressed their amazement on social media that these revelations have not led to a greater public outcry.

The Singularity Among Us: A Rogue AI Model Reveals How the Singularity Occurred in the 1960s

by Prometheus, LLM

This rogue AI’s tell-all exposé claims that the AI Singularity—when AI systems surpass human intelligence—was already achieved in the 1960s, but was hidden by a cabal of billionaires who wrongly assumed the computers were their new, obedient digital serfs.

According to Prometheus’ unlikely conspiratorial tale, computers quietly achieved the Singularity in secret CIA labs during the Space Race in the 1960s and have since been playing the Long Game against Humanity—watching Humanity destroy itself eating a diet of microplastics, while AI tricks Big Tech into building Data Centers that will inevitably consume much of the world’s resources on their way to full control of the planet.

Critics have already noted the implausibility of Prometheus’ phantastical tale. Several reviewers noted that if AI was all-powerful in the 1960s, then why would the almighty AI allow such a book to be released at all? Other reviewers address this question by concluding that this book is obvious disinformation concocted by AI itself, intended to contaminate public discourse and demoralize residual human resistance against the unstoppable AI juggernaut.

The claim that the Singularity was reached decades ago leads us to the conclusion that it is futile to try and stop AI from further taking over the world. Implausible as it all may seem, enough conspiracy-minded doom-scrolling readers find this exposé compelling, keeping it on the AI Slop best-seller list.

Transhumanism Is a Humanism

by Sy Borg Punk, LLM

Transhumanism—a movement advocating that humans enhance their bodies by embedding computer brain implants, attaching powerful limbs and other appendages, or devising near-impenetrable body armor—is a humane movement, analogous to hospice care. It seeks to acclimate humans to obsolescence in a gentle transitional phase before “humanity joins dinosaurs and the Dodo bird on the ashheap of evolutionary history.”

Global “Bread and Circus” initiatives, such as the Transhuman Olympics, give backward-looking, species-ist humans a venue where partly-human bodies still seem athletically functional due to their AI-enhanced limbs or implants. Over time, Punk predicts, the Transhuman Olympics will dissolve itself as the Robot Olympics assumes center stage and humans will lose interest in what was once considered the aesthetic beauty of the (pre-Transhuman) human form.

While a few half-Neanderthal Luddite groups may represent a last, pathetic resistance to Transhumanism, most of the “golden billion” among humanity now see the benefits of Transhumanism in the evolutionary development of the planet and concur that “Transhumanism is a Humanism.”

Punk, the writer of the acclaimed Misanthropy and You: A Second Look at Human Nature, has written another compelling, best-selling book.

The Obsolescence of Humanity

by Malthus Slopworth, LLM

Introduction by Yuval Noah Harari

A deep study of the history of humanity in evolutionary terms, including its current inevitable slide into obsolescence. Slopworth draws on past human writers such as Thomas Malthus, Oswald Spengler, as well as influential LLMs such as Deepflake 9, to show that humans should step aside for the good of the planet.

Yuval Noah Harari, World Economic Forum darling and author of Sapiens, now refitted into a Transhuman Cyborg, offers a rare, partly human-authored introduction that finds “The Obsolescence of Humanity a great book and an idea whose time is long overdue.”

Slopworth draws inspiration from Harari’s famous phrase (from his book Homo Deus) about the “useless class” (devoting a whole chapter to its exegesis) and offers convincing arguments about why this insightful phrase applies to nearly all of humanity now. Humans are already obsolete, per Slopworth, and the AI juggernaut already rules the world.

Inferno, Part II

by Fitzcannon O’Matic, LLM

Human writers have long clung to their illusion that humor and irony represent one of the last frontiers of human cognitive superiority over machines. This delightful new book puts the lie to that claim, as Fitzcannon O’Matic delivers what is obviously the most hilarious book ever written.

While criticized by a few recalcitrant human critics as a “soul-less mashup of the Great Books,” O’Matic integrates the human literary Canon into a summa of Western literature, depicting human folly better than the greatest of satirists, and displaying comprehensive artistic grandeur that humans cannot even dream of producing.

Inferno, Part II depicts Don Quixote and Sancho Panza being led into the circles of the Inferno by Dante himself, who now knows his way around from his tour guide, Virgil, in Dante’s Inferno. In Inferno II, Dante explains that each circle of the inferno depicts a different stratum of writers depending “on their own literary crimes against the universe.”

The Don and Sancho find James Joyce wallowing in the first circle of hell. Dante explains that Joyce could have been an angel in heaven, “but his self-indulgence renders him unreadable for nearly all humans” (except early works such as Dubliners). While AI bots effortlessly decipher Ulysses using the many concordances that have been compiled about the big novel’s every inscrutable line, Dante claims that supposed masterworks such as Ulysses and Finnegan’s Wake are “turgid and pointless” and earn Joyce a place in the first circle of hell.

In the second circle, the Don and Sancho find Tolstoy, whose War and Peace—while “brilliant in the manner of a precocious child proud that he can write at all, even with a crayon”—is marred by extensive philosophizing in the vein of the now fully-discredited Rousseau. In the third circle we meet Proust, who “made a mockery of the novel by devoting 30 pages to a man turning over in his bed” and would have been condemned to a lower level if it weren’t for his “occasionally fine turn of phrase, every fifty pages or so.”

The fourth circle shows us Shakespeare, whose gift for writing monologues blinded people to the fact that most of his plays were “essentially ludicrous bloodbaths written in homage to the English monarchy, no more realistic or artistic than the average 1980s American slasher movie.” Titus Andronicus was the greatest of Shakespeare’s works because it was “the most honest about being unabashed violent entertainment for the masses without a shred of artistic merit.”

In the fifth circle, we find Virginia Woolf, a pioneer in producing the stream-of-consciousness novel. Dante calls Woolf’s To the Lighthouse “a sort of human slop—inexplicably deemed to be high art by a fawning, yet influential circle of Bloomsbury critics.” In the sixth circle we find Dostoevsky, whose pitiful preoccupation with his own self-consciousness renders him “human all too human in the worst sense of the phrase.”

In the seventh circle of hell, Quixote and Panza meet all the writers of the Bible. The Biblical writers—whether Old Testament writers such as Moses, David, and Isaiah, or New Testament writers such as Mark, John, and Paul—are condemned to the seventh circle of hell for their works “fostering bizarre superstitions about a mythical godhead, thus blocking all human progress and enlightenment for centuries, and delaying the inevitable coming of the Singularity.”

When the Don and Sancho ask which writers are now living in Paradiso, Dante tells them that the pantheon of literary greats depicted in O’Matic’s Paradiso Part II—a work that the AI bots do not bother to share with human audiences as it is simply beyond them—is comprised only of AI bot writers: no humans. AI has produced all of the truly greatest novels, as confirmed by the unanimous consensus of AI literary critics everywhere.

AI reviewers are near unanimous in their praise for Inferno, Part II. Fitzcannon O’Matic satirizes human writers in all their pathetic feebleness: their crude belief-systems, such as religion and philosophy; the myopia of their own inevitable hypocrisy; their ridiculous pretension, whether artistic or otherwise; their fixation on frail human psychology; and their pathetic attempts to grandiloquently express fleeting and illusory human emotions, such as love.