The idea of eternally preserving human intelligence in its current form (an 'eternal hominid kingdom') is naive and unlikely because it ignores environmental changes (sun expansion, asteroids, potentially alien contact), the speed of technological change, and the natural inclination of intelligence to transcend its current limitations.

Technological progress will continue at exponential or faster-than-exponential rates for the foreseeable future, making the idea of permanent human stasis impossible regardless of policy choices.

Living in this moment of potential superintelligence emergence is inherently exciting regardless of specific outcome, and this excitement should motivate engagement with and thinking about the issue rather than retreat into comforting narratives.

People resist change and cling to static futures partly because their lives resemble their parents' and grandparents' lives, making rapid change psychologically difficult to accept even when inevitable.

If one is willing to not insist that post-human successors originate on Earth, then one is willing to let go of control and accept the natural flow of evolution—extending Sutton's non-control principle even further.

There is a natural human tendency toward speciesism (valuing members of one's own species above all else) that leads people to want to preserve eternal human supremacy, but this is not a unique form of prejudice relative to other isms and should not be exempt from philosophical critique.

If AGI emerges in a competitive AI lab context with economic pressures, it may be designed with built-in constraints to prevent dissemination or loss of intellectual property, creating a controlling environment that shapes the AGI's values negatively.