I find it interesting how the desire of the speaker is to prevent omnicide, yet he doesn't give a reason as to why this would be a desirable outcome. Since he's so familiar with the behavior of complex systems, and the fact that the history of both human civilization and all biological life is cyclical, I really have to wonder where the benefit lies in ensuring the continuation of these cycles, or rather where he sees such a benefit?
To create life is essentially to create a glorified problem and pain receptor, and said endeavor is only ever undertaken to alleviate the suffering of individuals, specifically those individuals who volunteer an existence of constant frustration and pain mitigation upon others. This life is not only ultimately pointless, but also an induction of constant harm upon whomever finds themselves in a state of conscious awareness/existence. I suppose other animals have the fortune of at least being incapable of understanding this reality, but that doesn't free them from the same problem, it only makes them incapable of doing anything to see about resolving it themselves.
Also, ever notice how most humans have this strange fixation with propagating life, including non-human life, even when it yields them no obvious or direct benefit? Terror Management Theory would assert, or at least imply that this is a result of people believing that life must have some sort of intrinsic value or meaning, as otherwise their own life is just as futile and doomed. That is to suggest that people might see the continuation of life itself as some sort of immortality for themselves, that if life exists, then they exist as well, at least in some capacity. I think this is accurate, but there is probably more to it than that. To be specific, it would seem that the "will to life" is so powerful that it can ultimately extend beyond and entirely supplant the urge to guarantee the continuation of your own existence, and evidently even the existence of potential offspring.
As far as I can tell, the reason the speaker doesn't explain why the continuation of life would be beneficial is either because he never asked himself the question in the first place, or more to the point, that he couldn't find reasons to justify this course of action even if he did. Regardless, it was an enjoyable talk either way.
