Or we could, you know, take better care of the planet we’re already on.
We could be doing our absolute best and still be surprised pikachus anyways. And there's no scifi remedy that will help us resolve these problems, we're not even K1, much less K2 - who's on Earth when it comes dies.
As the only known example of intelligent life in the observable universe, we should be doing everything we can to preserve ourselves. Having everyone on one planet is not a good idea if you're looking for survival on geological timescales (and/or have bad luck).
It is like Voltaire, Rousseau, Locke, Milton, Hobbes, Rawls never even existed and we don't have any sort of coherent understanding of political philosophy and how power is gained and enacted at the consent of the governed.
I also find that discussions of interstellar travel tend to conveniently ignore the fact that a society that develops to the point where this is feasible, must necessarily also have developed to the point of a fully post-growth economy, which leads to fundamental questions of why that society (or parts of it) would seek to undertake interstellar travel at all. It's a boring answer, sure, but many facts of life are quite boring.
Completely depends on if super-intelligence is possible from that AGI model, and if so, how fast the ramp up will be to super-intelligence.
The problem for insects is not that humans "dominate" them (in fact most insects have total "freedom"); the problem is that humans do not take the concerns of insects into account for any of their decision making.
Biological evolution takes millions of years to improve human intelligence. Artificial intelligence will be able to develop and deploy self-improvements within years, compounding its abilities.
All real power stems from old men talking in country clubs and golf courses. The super-smart people work in labs and universities and earn decent salaries while worrying about publication and citationd statistics and journal impact factors.
How does the AGI go golfing?
But then, if we have progressed to that level of technology, where we can send cells or even just DNA with the machines to be cultivated far away in the distant future... would we even bother? Would we even consider ourselves distinct from the machines by then? Honestly I'm not sure. It could very well be that we consider our creations to be our "children", so to speak. Destined to inherit the universe as we pass gradually into the dust from from which we came. It seems inevitable if we eventually crack AGI or artificial consciousness.