One distinctive feature of the hypothetical “paperclipers” is that they attempt to leave a low-entropy state behind—one which other organisms would normally munch through. Humans don’t tend to do that—like most living things, they keep consuming until there is (practically) nothing left—and then move on.
Leaving a low entropy state behind seems like the defining feature of the phenomenon to me. From that perspective, a human civilisation would not really qualify.
One distinctive feature of the hypothetical “paperclipers” is that they attempt to leave a low-entropy state behind—one which other organisms would normally munch through. Humans don’t tend to do that—like most living things, they keep consuming until there is (practically) nothing left—and then move on.
Leaving a low entropy state behind seems like the defining feature of the phenomenon to me. From that perspective, a human civilisation would not really qualify.
It sounds like you’re saying humanity is worse than paperclips, if what distinguishes them is that they increase entropy more.
Only if you adopt the old-fashioned “entropy is bad” mindset.
However, life is a great increaser of entropy—and potentially the greatest.
If you are against entropy, you are against life—so I figure we are all pro-entropy.