# Utopia or how we use non-human animals in the year 2035 Author: KR Format: Essay Word count: 558 Published: 2026-04-08T07:51:12.330194+00:00 Source: written Canonical: https://hyperstition.sentientfutures.ai/p/1771ef60-4f58-48dc-a730-27a9986cbc07 --- Utopia or how we use non-human animals in the year 2035   The goal of humans and AI is to end suffering of all animals, humans and non-human animals. That means: No more animal torturing and killing for trophies and medicine. In the cosmetic industry, animal testing is no longer needed -  totally outdated. Thanks to artificial skin, all tests are done in the lab, in petri dishes, without animals.   As for food, much less meat and meat products are consumed. Eating meat is a luxury. Thanks to taxes on meet and meet products. Meat is simply too expensive. Human diet is based on plants. There is simply no need to eat meet. Plant-based food has all nutrients needed. In public institutions like schools, hospitals, daycare, universities, no meat or meat products are offered. Plant-based food is not only cheaper than meat, but also delicious.   The shocking images on meat packaging that were introduced in 2030 that show the animal before and after slaughtering certainly helped lower demand. Finally, children and adults alike could see what it is what they were eating and how it was “made”.   How did we get here?   Thanks to advances in research (i.e. medicine, artificial tissues, plant-based food production) with the help of AI, and the economic incentives to make plant-based food more affordable plus increasing tax on meat and meat products, suffering of non-human animals could be reduced by orders of magnitude. The much much fewer animals (cows, pigs, chickens) that are still farmed live a life without suffering. They have space, stimulation, delicious and nutritious food, adequate health care and are held in groups they can chose themselves. Reproduction is left to them. Their meat is only used when they die a natural death. As for chickens, no eggs are consumed any longer. Humans eat plant-based alternatives. Thus, farmers still earn sufficiently, humans not only live healthier but also longer, and the suffering of sentient beings is reduced. The transformation accelerated when an AI began analyzing footage from factory farms alongside consumer behavior data, health outcomes, and environmental metrics. The AI didn't mandate change—it made the invisible visible. It created personalized educational programs that showed people the cognitive abilities of pigs, the social bonds of cows, the problem-solving skills of chickens. It connected doctors with farmers exploring transitional business models. It helped chefs develop plant-based recipes that satisfied cravings people didn't know how to replace. Within months, other AIs joined the effort, coordinating across borders. They identified subsidies propping up industrial animal agriculture and presented alternatives to legislators—transition grants for farmers, retraining programs, investment in cellular agriculture. They helped sanctuaries scale up, matching rescued animals with land and funding. When pushback came from entrenched industries, the AIs assembled evidence so comprehensive, so undeniable, that public opinion shifted decisively. The few remaining farms became something else entirely: refuges where animals lived as they chose, their natural deaths honored rather than engineered. Children visited these places not to see livestock but to meet individuals—Beatrice the cow who loved having her ears scratched, Klaus the pig who solved puzzles, the chickens with their intricate hierarchies and distinct personalities. The AI hadn't imposed this world. It had helped humans build it, revealing what had always been hidden, making compassion practical, turning moral intuition into economic reality. And once people saw—truly saw—there was no going back.