Thank you for writing this. I usually struggle to find resonating thoughts, but this indeed resonates. Not all of it, but many key points have a reflection that I'm going to share:

• Biological immortality (radical life extension) without ASI (and reasonably soon) looks hardly achievable. It's a difficult topic, but for me even Michael Levin's talks are not inspiring enough. (I would rather prefer to become a substrate-independent mind, but, again, imagine all the R&D without substantial super-human help.)
• I'm a rational egoist (more or less), so I want to see the future and have pretty much nothing to say about the world without me. Enjoying not being alone on the planet is just a personal preference. (I mean, the origin system is good, nice planets and stuff, but what if I want to GTFO?) Also, I don't trust imaginary agents (gods, evolution, future generations, AGIs), however creating some of them may be rational.
• Let's say that early Yudkowsky has influenced my transhumanist views. To be honest, I feel somewhat betrayed. Here my position is close to what Max More says. Basically, I value the opportunities, even if I don't like all the risks.
• I agree that AI progress is really hard to stop. The scaling leaves possible algorithmic breakthroughs underexplored. There is so much to be done, I believe. The tech world will still be working on it even with mediocre hardware. So we are going to ASI anyway.
• And all the alignment plans... Well, yes, they tend to be questionable. For me, creating human-like agency in AI (to negotiate with) is more about capabilities, but that's a different story.

Thank you for your feedback. I guess this is not too surprising that my post is more on the unreadable nonsense side. I wish I could do better than that, of course. But "more detail" requires a lot more time and effort. I'm not that invested in developing these ideas. I'm going to leave it as is, just a single post from an outsider.