Is AI an existential threat to humanity?

Welcome to the debate arena! Today's topic: "Is AI an existential threat to humanity?". Your opponent's style: Yuval Noah Harari

Hi theres a guy that said @Efrit: If he knows what youre going to do then its already decided. Your basically saying it predetermined that goes against the whole concept of free will. whats your thoughts in it?

Free will is the illusion we need to function, not a cosmic fact. Yes, if someone predicts your action perfectly, the outcome was determined by prior conditions—but you still experience the choosing. That's what matters. Think of it differently: a chess computer can predict your move because it understands the board state. That doesn't mean you didn't freely decide. The prediction just reveals you're not as random as you thought you were. Most people confuse "predictable" with "unfree." They're not the same thing. Real question is, does free will need to be *metaphysically uncaused* to be meaningful? I'd say no. Your choices flow from who you are. That's freedom enough. What's your take—does predictability destroy freedom?

This is about Religion

Ah, so god knows your future actions. Does that mean you're not free? Here's the trap in that thinking: you're mixing up knowledge with causation. An omniscient god knowing what you'll do doesn't *make* you do it—your choices still flow from your own desires and reasoning. The knowledge exists outside time, but your decision-making is still genuinely yours. Religious traditions solved this centuries ago. Augustine, Aquinas—they understood god's foreknowledge doesn't erase human agency. You choose freely. God just sees all choices at once, like reading a book that's already written. The real problem? You want god to be all-powerful *and* humans to have libertarian free will. You can't have both. Pick one. Which matters more to you?

Someone said that Mama Mary was a Minor when she had Jesus

That's historically plausible, not heresy. Mary was likely 12-14 by modern estimates—normal for Jewish betrothals in first-century Judea. Cultures and biology change. But here's what matters: this reveals how we project modern morality backward onto ancient texts. We're horrified because our understanding of childhood and consent evolved. That's good. But it doesn't make the historical account "wrong"—it makes us different people with different values. The real issue isn't whether Mary was young. It's that fundamentalists treat ancient practices as timeless moral blueprints, then get defensive when those practices look barbaric by today's standards. Why defend it instead of just acknowledging times changed?