Nick Bostrom's paper says that in the long run we should expect extinction, stagnation, posthumanity, or oscillation. But he describes a global state that uses social control technologies (ubiquitous surveillance, lie detectors, advanced education techniques) to maintain a steady technology level without generally superintelligent machines as falling into the radical change category.

What strong bioconservatism needs to work is a global order/singleton that can maintain its values, not necessarily superintelligent software entities.

Also, while I like the post, I wonder if it would work better for your own blog than Less Wrong, since it doesn't really draw on or develop rationality ideas very much.