First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  Next  Last
How do you feel about Transhumanism!
7523 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
17 / M / Crimson Mage Village
Offline
Posted 4/3/16
Right idea, wrong direction.


-WHY AREN'T WE TRYING TO USE THIS TO CREATE CAT-GIRLS?!!
27257 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
39 / Inside your compu...
Offline
Posted 4/3/16

Dariamus wrote:


RedExodus wrote:

inb4 we look like dis


More like





People seemed to have forgotten about the "Human Instrumentality Project"
VeggyZ 
2624 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
31 / M / North Dakota
Offline
Posted 4/3/16
I don't think there's anything inherently wrong with it, though it has it's dangers it doesn't actually change anything that humans already choose to do.

There's nothing wrong with improving oneself / one's situation. With that goal in mind, I can't help but see wanting to transcend your limits as the natural choice for humans to make.
33051 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / M / Texas
Offline
Posted 4/3/16

stars201 wrote:

I would rather have super powers naturally


As cool as cyborgs and laser arms might sound I agree with you.
7956 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 4/3/16 , edited 4/3/16
We don't need to merge ourselves with technology to make progress.
7420 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 4/3/16

odaplaX wrote:

We don't need to merge ourselves with technology to make progress.

I'm sure there will be some genetic engineering mixed in there too.

7956 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 4/3/16

Genetic engineering in transhuman ideology? Perhaps, but genetic engineering has a more practical end goal, enhanced humans; it's easier to percieve compared to the far-fetched future transhuminists want to create. They just want to make everyone a computer in human skin from what their movement advertises.
20714 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / Bundaberg, Queens...
Online
Posted 4/3/16

DarkFrostX wrote:


Ryulightorb wrote:


DarkFrostX wrote:

As someone who've studied Engineering I felt inclined to respond to this post,

Transhumanism is a cult, and an unrealistic fantasy.

I feel for anyone who goes into respected fields such as Engineering, Medicine, Or the Natural Sciences, thinking they can force some sort of synthetic evolution to occur are unrealistic and a little crazy.

They are not only delusional in my opinion, but they are also setting themselves up for a world of hurt when they realize that those fields are nothing like what they are portrayed to be in the movies..

Most Engineering jobs are rarely doing any research and development like that, chances are you will get a job improving the same technologies we've had for over a century, while sitting on your ass all day in a cubicle developing blood clots and becoming burned out on all the bullshit corporate rams down your throat.

Smaller niche startups usually get in to these kinds of fantasy based research, and they're no guarantees that such companies will even be around long enough to accomplish anything as they usually run out of money, I mean, not every company can sell bullshit and make a profit like Apple, (OK, I know! Bad joke xD ) Apple isn't all that bad lol.)

If you're one of the few lucky Scientist or Engineers who get to work at a big government grant backed R&D University or company, it's nothing like the movies, you will be working on teams, and your research and can span decades, you may be dead before anything is discovered, and even if you do discover anything, it may be proven to be trash later on. (typical science jobs I know, differences is they're actually trying to solve immediate problems using realistic approaches with the scientific method, and not dreamt up horseshit.)

It's waste of life in my opinion, work, live your life, then die and rot like the rest of us mortals, immortality and becoming omnipotent are two fantasies that are nowhere close to being a possibility.

Please for the love of "whatever" spear me the "They said the same thing about ____ Fill In the blank"

Yes many things were proven possible against all odds, however, if you look back at what was laughed at, those technologies did not exist beyond a lot of the scientific theories at the time.


EDIT: Yeah I know edited many times, I'm tired as hell and made so much spelling errors lol



", work, live your life, then die and rot like the rest of us mortals, immortality and becoming omnipotent are two fantasies that are nowhere close to being a possibility."

So basically i should probably just kill myself since i don't want to live and work a life if such goals are not attainable :P?

Now i suddenly has less reason to want to study may as well give up on university if you are correct :P

Well...i mean i am and can keep living on my pension so i will probably do that for the next 70 years if this is the case



Kill your self for what?

I mean, if that's what you to do, it's your life mate, I just wouldn't do that.

Goals are personal achievements that we can change if we wanted.

If you want to cling your life to the possibility that one day you will be an Immortal God, then by all means do so.

I did say it's a waste of life "in my opinion" didn't I? Your life doesn't belong to me or anyone, if you think that the goals of Transhumanism are obtainable, (despite evidence to the contrary) then the sky is your limit my friend, or in your case, they are no limits lol




True and it's just my belief that life is worthless without your goals and mine haven't changed in 10 years
20714 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / Bundaberg, Queens...
Online
Posted 4/3/16

odaplaX wrote:

We don't need to merge ourselves with technology to make progress.


we don't need to yes but it would be helpful and great imo.
20714 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / Bundaberg, Queens...
Online
Posted 4/3/16 , edited 4/3/16

nanikore2 wrote:


Ryulightorb wrote:

You are sounding rather idiotic claiming that something can't be "living" if it is made from a machine or a mixture of machine and cells.

I mean i understand your OPINION and what your saying and it does sound cultish but none of the arguments you have placed really make any reason to not strive for a future where we can go on living even if what lives on is only just a copy :P

The best point you made is

" isn't it a fact that our brain cells do not get replaced by new cells?"

Yes they do not IIRC so it's our job to find a way to prolong or rejuvenate them (if possible) if not the next best possibility is to find a way to copy the memories into a new body creating a clone to live on instead of the original.

I personally would be ok with death knowing another me is living on continuing what i want to do with my life and what work i want to get done,


I'm not the one sounding idiotic. You are, because you yourself doesn't understand the thrust of the argument. I was pointing out the futility of "life extension" by attempting to transfer the living into something that's not living. Not only that, you're ignorant as to the definition of what's living and what's not.

The least you can do is look it up yourself. One of the features of living things is respiration, and another would be reproduction. Yet another, I would add, would be some level of consciousness. Yes, even a plant would be more conscious than any machine that would ostensibly "replace" you. This is because artificial intelligence could never be conscious. It is a logical impossibility as I have indicated in another thread:


Robots don't "feel" anything, any more than amusement park animatronic "feel" or appear to "react" in a self-directed way to amusement park visitors.

They would "feel" things the way a Disneyland animatron "feel" things- By giving the appearance of a self-initiated reaction in place of an externally directed one.

An engineered appearance may become a de facto appearance if enough people believe in the charade, but it's not a bona fide phenomena.

All of robotics begin with low-level programming, a robot's brain wouldn't even know how to deal with any signal or any input unless an engineer explicitly defines what kind of signals it would take and how exactly it would process it. Any sentience or sapience exhibited would be an illusion produced by the engineer. There is no self direction because all direction are inherited from some kind of primitive programming. Complexity of a system also doesn't increase its sentience. If it does, then smartphones today would be sentient... The A8 processor in Apple iPhone 6 contains 2 billion transistors. Number of neurons in a house mouse? 71,000,000....

In philosophy of mind terms, an entity which can manipulate syntax does not require it to be semantic in nature. People having difficulty picturing this should also try to imagine the progression backwards; Just how primitive a calculation machine would have to be before they COULDN'T be viewed as sentient? ...Is an abacus sentient? How about a slide rule? Are people advocating pantheism/panpsychism without realizing it?

=============

I don't think it to be technically or even logically possible to create a sentient, "feeling", AI (I'll drop "learning" here, since that term contains some semantic landmines I'm too lazy to deal with now), for the reason that the process of its creation would render it non-sentient and non-"feeling". This process of injection of primitive programming renders the entity an automation by default. In short, for something to not to be an artificial intelligence, it can't be artificial. It has to be native. Only in nativity, i.e., birth, would an entity be freed from predetermination. The process of creating an AI is dramatically different from one of birth.

Whence this native intelligence... Certainly not from any sort of injection (programming).


As can be directly inferred from what I've written in the quotes above- No. A simulation doesn't "live" or exibit "life" via consciousness, any more than any other piece of software code. Therefore, your plans of having something "living" after you in the form of a sim is rendered moot.

Human lifespan has already been extended, and will continue to be extended, without a transhumanist agenda.



So you think immortality is possible without Transhumanist agenda?

Well then i would be curious to see what happens.

Also humans are not that different from Machines our mind functions on chemical reactions and follows basic instructions.
If you consider a Human living then why can't you consider a robot with self conciousness?

What's different about a human and a robot apart from the fact that we are made up of living cells?

Any sentience would be an illusion from the engineer sure but humans are not any different either in many respects because we also run off chemical reactions.

All our actions are made by our sub-conscious which are made by chemical reactions we aren't that much different then a machine the only difference is that we are of biological origin.

Yes they are not living in the sense as they cannot reproduce or breathe but humans are no different we are just biological instructions that play out so how are we any different in that respect just because we can breathe and reproduce?

It's idiotic to think that we are something that cannot be replicated by our own hands.



As can be directly inferred from what I've written in the quotes above- No. A simulation doesn't "live" or exibit "life" via consciousness, any more than any other piece of software code. Therefore, your plans of having something "living" after you in the form of a sim is rendered moot.


Ok so the better idea would be to have a child and genetically alter it :)? Because that's the only other option.
only problem there is that it's "Unethical" however if i have a child i want to design it and if i can't have that then i want to design something that is classed as living to leave behind and if i can't then i want to live the closest thing possible.

Even if you wouldn't class a robot as living it's the best alternative if society won't allow you to have your dreams and goals so i would happily settle for a robot that simulates life
715 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
19 / M
Offline
Posted 4/4/16 , edited 4/4/16
At one point someone is going to make the red pill. So instead of being like LSD where your mind becomes liberated for only 8 hours, they make a pill where your ego permanently shatters, and you become liberated forever.

When this day comes, humanity will see peace. Nobody has the patience to meditate for years, so this can be a shortcut to elevated consciousness. Then we can finally progress.
33510 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / M / U.S.A.
Offline
Posted 4/4/16 , edited 4/4/16

Ryulightorb wrote:

Also humans are not that different from Machines our mind functions on chemical reactions and follows basic instructions.
If you consider a Human living then why can't you consider a robot with self conciousness?
A robot cannot perform the functions of a living creature.


What's different about a human and a robot apart from the fact that we are made up of living cells?
Exactly that.


Any sentience would be an illusion from the engineer sure but humans are not any different either in many respects because we also run off chemical reactions.
wat


All our actions are made by our sub-conscious which are made by chemical reactions we aren't that much different then a machine the only difference is that we are of biological origin.
A machine that follows logical algarithms is a copy of the way that we think. IIRC synapses in reaction to stimulation of the human brain is random and completely dependent on various chemicals present at the time the stimuli. Humans can't even make a true randomizer because in order for something to be truly random, it cannot follow any sort of logic system. This line of thinking is impossible to the logic centered-brains that we have, therefore a true AI cannot be produced.


Yes they are not living in the sense as they cannot reproduce or breathe but humans are no different we are just biological instructions that play out so how are we any different in that respect just because we can breathe and reproduce?
You are repeating the same sophistry over and over, but the only one you've managed to convince is yourself.


It's idiotic to think that we are something that cannot be replicated by our own hands.
False, the moment we have the technology to replicate ourselves will be the moment we have the ability to think outside of a formal logic system.


Ok so the better idea would be to have a child and genetically alter it :)? Because that's the only other option.
I don't understand why you are posing this false dichotomy in the first place.


only problem there is that it's "Unethical" however if i have a child i want to design it and if i can't have that then i want to design something that is classed as living to leave behind and if i can't then i want to live the closest thing possible.
lel. If you are so deadset to pass your legacy on but you are unwilling to be reasonable about it, perhaps compromise towards the grounds of something such as a sperm bank is in order.


Even if you wouldn't class a robot as living it's the best alternative if society won't allow you to have your dreams and goals so i would happily settle for a robot that simulates life :)
On what grounds? I see nothing but causing more problems.
19197 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
22 / Cheney, wa
Offline
Posted 4/4/16
If there is no empathy, then there is no point in transhumanism.
20714 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / Bundaberg, Queens...
Online
Posted 4/4/16 , edited 4/4/16

XxDarkSasuxX wrote:


Ryulightorb wrote:

Also humans are not that different from Machines our mind functions on chemical reactions and follows basic instructions.
If you consider a Human living then why can't you consider a robot with self conciousness?
A robot cannot perform the functions of a living creature.


What's different about a human and a robot apart from the fact that we are made up of living cells?
Exactly that.


Any sentience would be an illusion from the engineer sure but humans are not any different either in many respects because we also run off chemical reactions.
wat


All our actions are made by our sub-conscious which are made by chemical reactions we aren't that much different then a machine the only difference is that we are of biological origin.
A machine that follows logical algarithms is a copy of the way that we think. IIRC synapses in reaction to stimulation of the human brain is random and completely dependent on various chemicals present at the time the stimuli. Humans can't even make a true randomizer because in order for something to be truly random, it cannot follow any sort of logic system. This line of thinking is impossible to the logic centered-brains that we have, therefore a true AI cannot be produced.


Yes they are not living in the sense as they cannot reproduce or breathe but humans are no different we are just biological instructions that play out so how are we any different in that respect just because we can breathe and reproduce?
You are repeating the same sophistry over and over, but the only one you've managed to convince is yourself.


It's idiotic to think that we are something that cannot be replicated by our own hands.
False, the moment we have the technology to replicate ourselves will be the moment we have the ability to think outside of a formal logic system.


Ok so the better idea would be to have a child and genetically alter it :)? Because that's the only other option.
I don't understand why you are posing this false dichotomy in the first place.


only problem there is that it's "Unethical" however if i have a child i want to design it and if i can't have that then i want to design something that is classed as living to leave behind and if i can't then i want to live the closest thing possible.
lel. If you are so deadset to pass your legacy on but you are unwilling to be reasonable about it, perhaps compromise towards the grounds of something such as a sperm bank is in order.


Even if you wouldn't class a robot as living it's the best alternative if society won't allow you to have your dreams and goals so i would happily settle for a robot that simulates life :)
On what grounds? I see nothing but causing more problems.



There is nothing unreasonable about having a child created and modified genetically atleast i don't think so.

Sperm banks won't do shit they won't allow me to make anything.

Maybe i should just have a child but move to a country that allows genetic modifications when we have that technology.

I want my dream to come true in some form and a single child won't work if i have to go through the process of letting nature take its course.

I don't see why i can't be allowed to have my dream people are just disgusting and want to take the happiness of others

I want to create a life and customize it in my lifetime is that to much to ask...surely that's not wrong to want or have as a goal.
33510 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / M / U.S.A.
Offline
Posted 4/4/16

Ryulightorb wrote:

There is nothing unreasonable about having a child created and modified genetically atleast i don't think so.
Nothing unreasonable about modifying a child that cannot consent?


Sperm banks won't do shit they won't allow me to make anything.
You have a strong desire to pass on your legacy, or your genes, but what you ask cannot be done for several moral implications arise from your thought process. What do you have to lose: besides a few sperm cells that is? It's called a compromise. You only put 50 in, and you only get 50 in return.


Maybe i should just have a child but move to a country that allows genetic modifications when we have that technology.
That would be any country with a black market.


I want my dream to come true in some form and a single child won't work if i have to go through the process of letting nature take its course.
Your dream is unreasonable. I won't tell you not to think that way, but I will tell you that very, very few will agree with it.


]I don't see why i can't be allowed to have my dream people are just disgusting and want to take the happiness of others
mmmmm tears are my favorite.


I want to create a life and customize it in my lifetime is that to much to ask...surely that's not wrong to want or have as a goal.
I like the automatron DLC as much as the next guy, but Fallout 4 is just a game.
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.