Are there any good arguments against transhumanism?
Is there a good argument for it? It's a meme.
>start talking about politics or philosophy with somebody
>whenever they say anything it's about post-scarcity, automation, self driving cars, transhumanism or some other sci-fi bullshit
>>1113855
>eliminate ageing
Also, implying that plebs won't simply kill you if anything approaching the optimistic fantasies of transhumanists becomes a possibility for a select few only.
Theres not really much to talk about since we cant modify our bodies yet enough for it to be a significant enough boost to be worth it.
>>1113862
Is that you?
Not really, but transhumanism isn't relevant yet. We can't put chips into our brains to make information processing fast enough to justify an actual discussion about the subject. We can't put laser beams into our corneas.
There is no point in discussing the topic yet for a vast majority of people.
In 50 years we will find that we are unequipped to have a real discussion and it will become Trump/Hillary tier debate material
>>1113874
no it's a pretty well-known picture
Transhumanism already exists though. What do you think wheelchairs and prosthetic limbs are?
Many people also have hearings aids and cyborg eyes.
>>1113882
Yeah but most of them arent really worth replacing limbs and body parts over yet.
>>1113855
khan
>>1113882
>hearing aids
That last time I heard AIDS was when I tried reading your bullshit out loud.
>>1113888
Suck my dick faggot.
>>1113855
>>1113886
"V'ger is that which seeks the Creator"
>>1113880
Should have said yes, she probably had a crush
Because i don't want M$ controlling my body.
It's literal cancer
>>1113855
transhumanism is like the opisate of wat we r doing
we are to busy creating technology to dumb down and destory the minds and bodys of our fellow man as opposed to improving
anyone endorsing transhumanism has problems with their ego, and mainly a lack thereof.
clearly compensating for something.
Complete ego death isn't all that great,
taking consiousness out of the box that its your head, and putting it into a box that probably has much more limitations
also depending on 3rd party software
and 3rd party hardware.
>>1113862
>automation, self driving cars
>sci fi bullshit
>>1113904
That's one sure way to get AIDS.
>>1113855
Its going to happen, just not like the terminator shit.
It would indeed be a much more human like robot or a human clone.
>tfw you transplant yourself into a eternal 12 year old qt loli
inb4 feminists cry MUHSOGGYNEE
>>1113855
Not at all if your comfy with the thought that half of your body will belong to Apple and your bionic arm wont stop punching your dick unless you pay treefiddy every day.
>>1113855
It will end our consciousness. We're already getting there at a fast clip with current technology.
THOU SHALL NOT MAKE MACHINE IN LIKENESS OF HUMAN MIND
>>1113855
If you're a materialist, then no there is no reason you should not go transhumanist.
I think we're suppose to die though. I don't want to be in a body forever, and transhumanism will basically trap you on the material plane forever. Some people believe that this is the hell that so many people were talking about since one of eternal fire may not actually exist.
A cyborg body sounds pretty shit. I'd take an immortality booster shot although I'm not sure how you'd stop the cancers.
>>1114662
Not really eternal if you can die outside of aging.
>>1114665
Good point. I was thinking that perhaps your consciousness could be in the cloud or something. So you would always be alive somewhere.
>>1113855
It's a perversion of the human form and a sin against God.
First off, what kind of transhumanist future are we talking about here? Cyberlimbs for the general population? Genetic therapy? Vat-grown organs cloned from your DNA? Robotic automation for menial tasks?
I mean, all of these things have great, obvious positives, the issue comes from conditions that aren't suited to adapting them. For example, if we could replace all workers with robotic slaves, we'd essentially eliminate 2/3s of the workforce or more overnight in the US and Europe. This would lead to, at best, the old population sitting on welfare and doing nothing for society because they don't know how to do office worker and technical jobs, they can't compete with managers and executives, and the majority lack the ability to produce compelling art. At worst, these people would instead sit around in squalor, growing in dissidence to the point where there'd be rebellion to return to the old ways.
Replacement organs and limbs for those who can afford them? We already have something similar in place which is the subject of much debate. To be able to give everyone who needs such treatment care would put a massive strain on public resources or create debt slaves as people work their whole life to pay off their treatment. And if these treatments actually created people more fit and capable than people without them to a significant degree, you'd create two classes of people far beyond an economic divide.
Genetic therapy also opens many doors. We could seek out and eliminate undesirable genes within the population and either force their removal or brand those that carry them. Imagine having to list on your medical file that you were born with a gene carried by 15% of the population which said you were prone to several genetic diseases or were at high risk for the development of offspring being born with severe deformities or hampered mental states.
Society is not at the point yet of supporting transhumanism because social structure isn't developed enough.
>>1114662
>If you're a materialist, then no there is no reason you should not go transhumanist.
If you're a materialist, you basically have no possible explanation about how you can preserve your mind in non-brain form.
>>1114683
I checked with God and he said it was just fine, he doesn't have a problem with it.
>>1113855
YOU WANT TO CREATE UBERMENSCH???
YOU ARE LITERALLY HITLER AND RAPIST!!11
>>1114706
>thinking he speaks for God
How's Hell looking?
>>1114681
That does sound pretty hellish so I certainly wouldn't volunteer. At least in the long long term the heat death of the universe would end any potential afterlife.
>>1114699
WAAAAY more than two thirds, the problem with robotics is we haven't developed a robot capable of using reason to overcome issues. They're also not as flexible or reliable as people.
If you fixed all that then there wouldn't be a lot of doctors, builders, lifestyle magazine people, soldiers, surgeons or accountants and so on.
>>1113855
No, just a bunch of tiresome religious moralizing. Ignore the imbeciles.
>>1114712
Why would God send his prophet to Hell?
>>1113855
its not that the technological development will not happen, its happening right now, its just that transhumanism is rather a naive set of concepts, mostly centered around personal body augumentation and the like
things will probably function somewhat different, and its probably not gonna be about making superhumans, just regulating the metabolism, fixing bad kidneys, implanting new eyes, maybe grafting some extra brainpower at great risk, that kinda thing
collectively the technologies involved will have a much greater impact in terms of communication and control, for example, erasing the boundary betveen a users mind, the interface, the system used, all the minds of other users
also its a great way to control and manipulate a human population, check out chinese biotech institutions
besides mtf transexuals and steroid laden bildos have pretty much started it allredy, so it kind of gives you a idea about the mentality of it all from a personal perspective
>>1114719
It doesn't even address the issue of what would happen in other nations that didn't have access. Imagine China losing all US trade because now instead of outsourcing all production to Chinese workers who can work for pennies a day, you can cut them out too for automatons. Suddenly, China's got a humongous set of unemployed, and pretty much the only paths available to them are rebel in the homeland or have their government ship them out as soldiers to start a war.
Any sort of "transhumanist" society will certainly come about over time as our technology and understanding improves, but to simply push it forward to now because we can will be met with disaster, much like Europeans disseminating their technology to peoples of the world who haven't gone through their own line of thought to arrive at their development. We'd have the ability, but not the sense on how to use it.
>>1113855
>OP hasn't responded to any of the posts against transhumanism
>its another "OP shitposts about transhumanism then leaves" thread
>>1114662
I'm a materialist and I think there are plenty of arguments to be made against transhumanism. There's simply no way we will be able to implement it fairly across the world which will lead to even greater wealth imbalances which in turn is a powerful destabilizing force. Secondly while I can see the benefits for an individual to never die (though I think we'd all eventually kill ourselves out of pure ennui). Transhuamnism simply has to many horrible implications for society as a whole.
>>1113855
its nothing but Protestant eschatology with some of the terms switched up to make it sound less "religious"
its a load of utter rubbish either way because its built atop utopian fantasies and supreme egotism
>>1114332
self driving cars are a load of rubbish
they will never be commonplace
>>1115566
>Automobiles are a load of rubbish
>they will never be commonplace
>Aeroplanes are a load of rubbish
>they will never be commonplace
>Computers are a load of rubbish
>they will never be commonplace
>Portable cellular phones are a load of rubbish
>they will never be commonplace
>>1113855
>living forever
NO
>>1115566
Lol
They will be commonplace by the end of the decade.
>>1115591
ok m8 I'll bite since its obvious you've never given the prospect of a self-driven car much thought.
there are two major reasons why they will never be commonplace
the first is in the event of an accident (which there will be) who is at fault?
is it the owner even if he wasn't driving?
is it the manufacturer?
is it the programmer?
its ripe for a ton of abuse not to mention plenty of insurance issues.
and secondly in the event of a crash such a car must be programmed to kill the driver if the scenario is similar to the trolley-lever one
if there are a bunch of people in the road, and the car has the option of swerving which would cause a crash and kill only the owner, or just plowing through them, it would obviously choose the former.
no one wants to buy a car which is programmed to sacrifice them.
there are other reasons as well but these two are the biggest.
Humans must always be the ones making the choices.
>>1115638
until the lawsuits start rolling in
>>1115649
ok m8 I'll bite, since it's obvious you've never given the prospect of a train much thought.
the first is in the event of an accident (which there will be) who is at fault?
is it the engineer even if he's doing fuck all?
is it the manufacturer?
is it the programmer?
>>1115566
They are already testing early self-driving eighteen--wheelers in Germany. They need a driver to manage them, but they handle speed and keeping in the lane all by themselves.
I always see transhumanists as just sad lonely people who think technology can save them from their dreary lives.
these are the sorts who in 70 years will be broken down cyborgs left over from the fad years prior and now living on disability due to being outdated heaps of rubbish desperately clinging onto their horrid rusting lives as everyone else around them has embraced genetic engineering
>>1115655
Lawsuits wouldn't go anywhere unless insurance attributes the fault to the automation.
>>1115667
a train is driven by a person and on rails
it can only go one way and its path is very clear for all those around
not even close to comparable to an automated car among thousands of other automated cars on the road.
>>1115667
If the machine were at fault, rather than a human driver, it would just be like with faulty breaks or something like that. The idea of a machine accidentally crashing into something is highly unlikely though.
>>1115684
That is, with faulty brakes, the company gets sued, but they do a recall and correct the problem, they don't just stop making cars because of possible brake defects.
>>1115677
you say that but once such situations happen they are inevitable
and juries will always have a sore spot for "rouge tech"
>>1115684
how do you ensure this? only by further limiting human freedom
in order to make the roads safer for robot cars, by necessity all cars will have to be robotic and hooked up to a singular cloud network in order to organize traffic.
more than that, robot cars will only go down certain roads as prescribed for them by their programming further constraining us along such ridged lines.
honestly the fact that people see such things as a "good" outcome is astonishing, I can only imagine what strange sorts of people are being birthed now to be so desperate to operate on binary lines.
>>1115680
How is the issue of how many cars on the road specific to automated vehicles? Those cars are still on the road and human error causes most accidents. Countless lives would be saved through automating motor vehicles.
And when it comes to a fully automated roadways, lawsuits and crime would decrease as well. No more DUIs and no more drunk drivers. I'd take one death through the trolley/lever issue over thousands of preventable deaths caused by simple human error.
>>1115655
I suggest you go look at the stats anywhere in the world at a developed or undeveloped country. Deaths due to car accidents are one of the most significant causes of early death, the largest type of death by accident and uniformly higher than the murder rate. The vast majority are caused by human error.
There is no reason to think self-driving cars aren't going to be considerably safer.
Technology tends toward avoidance of risks by investors. Uncertainty is ruled out if possible. People generally prefer the predictable. Few recognize how destructive this can be, how it imposes severe limits on variability and thus makes whole populations fatally vulnerable to the shocking ways our universe can throw the dice.
You don't really need to make one. It will either become a thing, or it wont.
>>1113855
Corrosion.
>>1115702
>limiting human freedom
What, to drive drunk and too fast? To get lost on backroads with no way to communicate with help?
A car is a tool. A tool designed to move me from one place to another. My human freedoms are being limited by having to operate the car. I'd rather be reading, or drawing, or doing work on my laptop.
>>1115728
except in this case you no longer decide how to use that tool
the tool moves on its own and you are frankly superficial to its working
fears of terminators rising up and taking over are unfounded, we are giving everything we have to the machines without a fight anyways.
>“All of a sudden, we’ve lost a lot of control,’ he said. ‘We can’t turn off our internet; we can’t turn off our smartphones; we can’t turn off our computers. You used to ask a smart person a question. Now, who do you ask? It starts with g-o, and it’s not God…”
― Steve Wozniak
>>1115737
>the tool moves on its own and you are frankly superficial to its working
Good? I already explained I don't like driving and when you have to make 11 hour drives you learn to hate driving. Do you get pissed off by ATMs, factory robots, and electric pencil sharpeners? I'm superficially operating the sharpener in that case too. I just plug it in and it works. No manual control.
Our whole lives are essentially automated at this point already. I'd rather have my freedom to focus on more important things than the manual operation of a car.
>>1115723
No freedom is being sacrificed. Trying to crowbar a Franklin quote in randomly is no point at all.
>>1115723
This quote could apply to seatbelt laws too. Do you wear a seatbelt? Why? Isn't that limiting your freedom too?
>>1115765
>Do you get pissed off by ATMs, factory robots, and electric pencil sharpeners?
yes
I like being able to interact with a human when getting my money
factory robots kill jobs
and pencil sharpeners take away my ability to control the sharpness of my pencil
>>1113888
w i t n e s s e d
>>1115778
how can it apply?
one straps you into your chair
the other is taking away not only your ability to choose your own destination in life, but also the skills required to operate a vehicle yourself
I'd say automatic transmission is similar in effect, though obviously not as limiting
today no one can fix their own cars for even minor issues, and few people know how their transmission system works
everything is becoming more and more detached from humanity
>>1113862
You literally said: "I don't care about the future, I care only about the past."
>>1115896
He's right, fuck the future.
>>1115896
future =/= fantasy
>>1113855
Because it has very little basis in science and is espoused by brainlets who only know pop-science?
People who think that robots or computers will one day make mankids lives perfect, become sentient robo-waifus, make you live forever, and/or take control of society and all the work while we get a set living wage because we've made a post-scarcity society only show they know almost nothing about computers or robotics
On the self driving car:
Apply the trolley dilemma to a self driving car.
Should the self driving car sacrifice the driver, who did nothing wrong to save a more numerous group of pedestrians who did something wrong? /g/ had an interesting discussion on this.
>>1115998
I don't see that the self driving car has any data on "who did nothing wrong" or "who did something wrong".
>>1116113
Ten kids are jaywalking in the middle of the road. Car sensors detect them and think "OH SHIT, it's either crash into those kids or swerve into that oak tree!" The wrong in this case is the illegal/foolish/dangerous act.
>>1113855
Transhumanism willl just come in many subtle ways. Retards cannot understand that we put the impossible on movies and films to dream about something else that may not come.
>>1113866
>>humans flying
>>humans landing on the moon
>>humans harnessing electricity that we had only seen occur as lightning to light their homes and shitpost on the internet
Implying amaright guys
implying amaright?
>>1115723
I'm not sure I want people to have the freedom to get drunk and drive several tonnes of steel around and I think heroin should probably be legal.
>>1114703
Only materialists believe that is possible since they don't believe there is anything supernatural about the brain such as the mind or the soul that can't be replicated through other physical analogues.
>>1114723
You prophesied the wrong one, so the right one is pissed, just like all the losers in the old testament who thought their god was hot shit.
>>1115797
>taking away not only your ability choose your own destination in life, but also the skills required to operate a vehicle yourself
First off, come off it, most self-driving cars will always keep a way for the owners to take control and drive whenever they want, as technology will never really be fool-proof and you'll want to be able to save yourself in the off chance something goes wrong
Second, to be honest, there's not really a reason WHY we need to know how to operate a vehicle once they're all self-reliant
We only bother in the first place because:
A. We like driving
or
B. We need to get from point A to point B, and a car's the fastest way to do it
If you're in the A. camp, guess what, you'll still be able to drive, and if you're in B., then all it's done is just make your commute easier, plus if you want to argue that it's bad, then you're pretty much saying any transit system where only the driver is doing any driving is robbing people of their important freedom, and that shit's been around since before this country was even a gleam in Britain's eye
>>1113855
legit science and medicine is better than scifi and feddoras
Why? These are all inevitabilities, will have profound impacts on society and humanity as a whole, are within the realms of philosophical and social discussion and are extremely interesting to discuss. Genetic modification in particular, this is going to be the largest science of the next few centuries and is going to completely change society.
>>1115755
But google is god. He is what weve been waiting for centuries
>>1113855
Transhumanism is letting a toddler get a tattoo. It will win though, I am afraid. 'The hands and brains of soulless men destroy what time will never build again'
>>1118409
You sound like a YouTube comment
>>1115649
>ethical issues prevent technology from becoming commonplace
Yeah, nah.
>>1118415
T-thanks..
playing god is a death knell
what don't fucking liberals understand about this
>>1118442
>letting yourself get spooked by the idea of "playing god"
>>1118442
>muh liberals
Right wingers play god all the time, my dear /pol/fag
>>1118458
absolute lies and falsehoods. The right believes in nature as it is.
>"It is the common doom of man that he must eat his bread by the sweat of his brow, that is, by the sweat of his body, or the sweat of his mind. Every attempt to fly from it, and to refuse the very terms of our existence, becomes much more truly a curse, and heavier pains and penalties fall upon those who would elude the tasks which are put upon them by the great Master Workman of the World."
liberals need to stop eluding the tasks the great Master Workman has put upon them. It's getting out of control.
1. You lose your humanity. 2. Fear and emotions are barriers, so those MIGHT leave. 3. Biological reproduction takes too long, so more cloning and less sex. 4. Screw it, basically perfection makes you a robot. That is the idea.
>>1118487
You're an idiot because every technological development since agriculture has reduced the amount of labor necessary for people to sustain themselves.
>>liberals need to stop eluding the tasks the great Master Workman has put upon them. It's getting out of control.
Fuck that shit, you can take your superstitions and shove them. I look forward to our glorious transhuman future.
>>1118510
do you know what ennui is? do you know what alienation is? do you know what the degeneration of modern culture represents?
YOU are cursed and YOU will suffer the pains and penalties for turning your back on the reality of existence, and for eluding the tasks put upon you by the Master Workman.
You're literal cancer.
>>1118354
>guess what, you'll still be able to drive
this makes it or breaks it for me mate.
>>1116131
you turn on the eurobeat and get ready for a wild ride.
>>1115566
This atleast for people who like driving, I like driving for instance, I will never own a fully automated car, if it let's me drive manualy then yes, but if not that thing can fuck itself and will stick to a good old reliable Passat for driving around the city
>>1118523
YOU are still an idiot. None of the things you mentioned are even a tenth so bad as having to labor in the fields to grow food.
>>1113855
It's a bunch of liberal bullshit OP.
>MUH TRANSHUMANISM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FSQNdbq32OU
>>1113855
What do u guys think of plato beeing pro transhumanist idea?
>>1115998
Yes, because doing so would be the legal thing to do.
Take the automatic piloting out of the equation entirely. If YOU'RE driving a trolley, and there's a group of people standing/lying in the middle of the road, there are zero scenarios in which running them over does not result in you going to prison.
The law says that if someone is on the road, you stop. If you can't stop you swerve.
>>1113882
>>1113885
All of our current "cybernetics" just replace the original flesh with varying degrees of success.
No one has yet to make a prosthesis or implant that is clearly superior to the organic parts they're replacing.
>>1118623
Dammit /pol/ stop using your buzzwords out of context, the modern left has no interest in transhumanism.
>>1120531
Bionic limbs are superior to real ones, bionic eyes are superior to real ones, organic body parts are soft flawed shit.
>>1113855
>Use cellphone
>You are using technology to enhance your ability to communicate
>Nobody cares
>Place cellphone under your skin
>STOP! YOU ARE PLAYING GOD!
The only people who are allowed to say transhumanism is bad are Mennonites.
Why are people so shortsighted about all of this transhumanism thing?
I'd say we're almost there as it is. While not directly wired to our brain, most people think of their cell-phone as an extension of themselves. It's proven at this point using Google maps actually subtracts from your brain's ability to discern direction. To me the phone has already replaced or overlapped many brain functions. We're cyborgs and we don't know it
>>1120595
Uh no
In the same way that a sharpened stick enhances our utility it does not make you a cyborg.
A cyborg is explicitly part machine and part man.
>>1113855
Integrating human biology with electronic technology (or especially replacing it altogether), would make us exceedingly prone to a 1984/Brave New World type of society, where the government has absolute control. Freedom of the individual would be an ancient, forgotten concept.
>>1122607
Not physically, but we are already accepting of machines taking over mental function. The advent of computers was the first time machines could really take over mental processes and not just physical ones.
If you use the technologies such as phones, tablets, GPS ect, that make your life easier, just like using a calculator removes you having to mentally work out an equation, your brain is deferring to a machine. At the point a machine is supplanting natural brain function you are a cyborg. You might as well get it put in your head because it's the same thing.
>>1113855
Technology has never fixed any of mankind's broader social problems. No matter how cool the wheel, bronze, steam power, rockets, or laptops are and how nice they make our physical lives- the same social forces that caused poverty, war, and angst that existed 10,000 years ago will exist today.
It's just raising technology to act as a proxy Jesus for fedoras.
>>1113855
>implying transhumanism is real
>implying technology and AI will ever reach the capabilities of mankind itself
>>1113855
Oh shit, I didn't even realize there was a whole movement for robot people. I am literally studying to become a scientist that makes augmentations and cybernetic enhancements just because I saw an article about it and thought it would be cool.
>>1123577
How did you get started studying in that field? What is your actual degree?
>>1123812
I am currently studying to become a computer scientist but I have a little background in the medical field from some volunteer work I did during highschool. I'm not too far in college right now so after my CIS stuff is done I have an opportunity to try for a second degree in medicine, so I guess the end goal is to be a bio engineer or something.
I have no idea what transhumanism is and I Kinda wish it'd show up on this board more, even if seems more or less like futuristic humanism philosophy rather than history.
>>1113855
It's ad hominem, but it's generally true that transhumanistic futurists are all biased due to the fear of their own mortality. All of them predict some revolutionary immortality procedure a few years before actuarial tables say they should die.
>>1114104
Glasses and smart phones are examples of transhumanism. We are surrounding ourselves with devices that rarely leave our side and increase our ability.
>>1123539
>sigmoid curve
Unless you literally think we're done with all new technology in the next five years or so, that still means we're about to go "way up".
>>1113855
Depends on how quickly the technologies are introduced, how efficient they are, and how they're priced. If a game changing tech is released at a high price, the wealthy will become far more productive than the poor, and social classes might solidify. That's just my call, no clue how true it is
>>1116131
The car should save the driver. And honestly no one is gonna buy a self driving car that could kill themin favor of saving some strangers
>>1115649
I suggest you research Quantum Computing, here is a link with a quick over view of the science.
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0dXNmbiGPS4
Remember that technological explosion that happened when computing became common place? What do you think is going to happen when Quantum Computing is common place? Quite frankly there is no way you can know, I will say given a big enough computer controlling every single car on the roads at any given time will be child's play for it.
>>1118275
> Only materialists believe that is possible since they don't believe there is anything supernatural about the brain such as the mind or the soul that can't be replicated through other physical analogues.
Which is retarded because it by extension means that you'd have to believe that all Ford Tauruses are the same car since they're just the same replicated blueprint.
Materialism is a retarded dead end. I'd rather be a superstitious Neolithic savage if I have to choose between holding onto my individuality/human dignity and "science".
I have a soul.
I am not interchangeable with a goddamn biomechanical golem that just happens to look like me.
>>1113855
It's your body, do what you want with it. I think genetically engineering children is fine because gene selection is something we already do (ie picking who to have a child with). However giving cyborg implants to a child would be wrong, they have to make the choice themself.
There is none.
>>1113855
Do you mean the kind of transhumanism that's just an extension of existing medical science, improving and preventing instead of curing?
Or the kind where someone turns the planet into paperclips because they left the AI on too long?
There's somewhat of a difference there.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=tOJ2XxKG7bw
This is relevant to your interests.
>>1126568
No, it would be like saying if you rebuilt a Ford Taurus with all new upgraded parts piecewise, in the end its technically still the same car.
>>1126568
(I have no overtly positive images on my phone to indicate my agreeing with you more succinctly, so please accept this image of the winners of the next Superb Owl)
>>1114662
I don't think having a copy of me "outliving" me is the same as cheating death or something like that. It would be a copy of me, not me. But that would still be cool. If people were less irreplaceable death wouldn't be such a big deal. Like, if you were a writer you could die easily knowing your masterpiece would still be completed as if you finished writing it yourself.
I get that could be a disturbing thought for some people, but I'd jump on the chance if I had it.
>>1113912
constantine is a woman?
>>1126508
But I'd probably swerve into the oak tree if I had control. Most of us have knee-jerk reactions against killing large groups of people.
>>1113861
>there are no good arguments for improving the human condition
http://www.nickbostrom.com/fable/dragon.html
>>1115649
I guess none of the people who pumped billions into self-driving cars gave the prospect much thought, and neither did the army of engineers and legal consultants they hired.
>>1115783
Factory robots make production cheaper though, the free market wills it.
>>1118442
Nigger im a fucking right libertarian fuck off with your playing god spooks
>>1113879
Just because it isn't a problem yet doesnt mean you shouldn't discuss about it.it's called prevention.
I think the problem with transhumanism/augmented reality is that we lose the connection to our human,imperfect core.Mental health would be in danger with a metal body
>>1123539
ugh... I was agreeing with you until you start assuming stuff about AI.
Your assumption that AI can't or can do is a retarded "hope" that you will not be outmatched.
technology capabilities aren't unlimited. And they will probably slow down at some point.
But you are naive if you think your humanity is some sort of irreplicable soul-like feature. You're an inconsecuential bag of meat. You're not special. And if the retard hopeful singularitard is an idiot, you are even worse.
"Bu-but machines will not be able to do art"
"B-But machines will not be able to do hard thinking tasks"
Machines will specially be able to do hard thinking tasks.
I work at an outgoing call center doing political polling. When I'm doing my job well, and the respondent doesn't cause too many problems, I'm asked if I'm a robot.
I think this is a good example of a job that could soon be automated once AI gets a little more advanced and a little more personable (unlike tech support or sales, you're supposed to avoid building rapport with the respondent).
>>1116474
Except transhumanism is fantasy bullshit, and not something that'll happen like those
>>1115566
>Literally the stupidest post in all of history
>>1115723
>tumblr tier "deep"
>>1115649
Who is at fault?
If the mistake was in the car itself, then it's the manufacturer at fault, if the owner somehow intervened which caused the accident, of course its his fault, I think in most cases it would be pretty easy to tell whose fault it is.
>>1118523
I feel like those graphics are putting things out of order. Having a lot of non-marital sexual partners is an indicator of mental issues that lead to unstable marriages, depression and suicide
>>1123539
there most probably is a limit, yes.
But what makes you think that advanced AI and robotics are anywhere NEAR that limit?
My guess would be that faster than light travel is at the limit, but even then I might be wrong. The whole point is that we never know. Wasn't it at the turn of the 20th century that the scientific consensus was that all of the scientific discoveries that were possible to make were already made? We just never know, man.
And speculation aside, it's always worth it to try instead of giving up anyway
>>1123577
Shit man, I've done some brain computer interface work too. Nothing to me is as cool as this though
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1QPiF4-iu6g
>>1113855
SJWs will find some reason to complain and shit all over it don't worry about it.
I know how to transcend my humanity.
I use an archaic form of HIGH-tech.
>>1136416
hard to believe that this video is eight years old. Kinda gives a scale on how fast technology grows.
Like, check out this video from four years ago about a prosthetic arm with a hand that's range of movement can be controlled by forearm muscles.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_qUPnnROxvY
And then out of nowhere just recently this pops into my news feed about an even more advanced military arm that has even more range of motions and can flex with dumbbells.
http://www.techinsider.io/advanced-darpa-prosthetic-arm-2016-5
swoll robutts
>>1113855
Mechanical cybernetic transhumanism has serious downfalls. People already live beyond their means due to dumb things like credit card debt or buying cars and other luxuries they cannot pay for in tax. So what of cybernetics when its advancement becomes a thing beyond fiction. Personally I don't want a bank able to repo my left arm, nor would I enjoy being brain or body hacked and otherwise. But when people start replacing their bodies and limbs as they would loan for a house, some nasty shit is going to start happening.
>>1125539
>Unless you literally think we're done with all new technology in the next five years or so, that still means we're about to go "way up".
>>1136618
Contrary to popular 4chan opinion, if transhumanism really becomes popular and feasible SJWs shitting on it will do absolutely nothing to stop it.
>>1130217
Really? I'd just hit the break.
>>1113855
It won't really change humanity.
I'd love to fuck a sentient robutt with my 12 inch nanomachine enhanced cock in some rainy dirty neonlit city but people thinking that cybernetic limbs or chips to make you think faster are going to be some miraculous thing that turns you into a member of a race of perfect superhumans are fooling themselves. They'll be just insignificant as the meatbags. The complexity of the individual will never change no matter what level of technology we achieve
The big downside comes into effect when we start factoring in things like the human brain and security from human/transhuman/AI threats
>>1136243
don't tell him that, you'll crush his worldview
>>1137829
... You realize that's for a single invention, not all of technology, right?
>>1133779
Good point, a lot of people fail to realise that even though we are our brains, our minds are still very much dependant on the state of our bodies considering the millions of years of synchronicity between body and mind, I just don't think living in a metal shell is going to be very fun.
>>1126558
Nice pop sci you fucking pseud.
>>1140507
Not him.
http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/cross-check/scott-aaronson-answers-every-ridiculously-big-question-i-throw-at-him/
>>1113855
robots are gay
>>1114723
>
>>1113855
What part of your body has transcended basic functions trough use of bionics?
Why do you consider talking about sci-fi scenarios and theoretical theories about purely theoretical stuff is useful?
Become an engineer and study, experiment on - test it on different living organisms see if you can participate to it if you so much care.
>>1113855
I just want a robot body.
>>1114572
>tfw you transplant yourself into a eternal 12 year old qt loli
this anon gets it
>>1118590
I believe the most widely used model (i.e. tesla) is one that you can switch on/off.
which is cool, you can drive to the party, get fucked up, then have your car DD
>>1115896
>caring about the future on a board devoted to history on a Finno-Korean Hyperwar Reenactors Hookup site.
If we're going to be destroyed by extremely advanced AI, why not advance ourselves?
>>1115896
> On /his/tory
> Caring about the future
Seriously senpai?
>>1115896
Technology is gay and nerdshit
>>1114572
Thats more paedophillia you weirdo
>>1113855
Would a creature without emotions even want to do anything?
>>1144478
Technology is why you didn't die of multiple easily prevented diseases when you were a child, technology is how you have clean water and food, technology is the only reason why we are capable of communicating over the internet like this.
Also
>Not wanting to have an unaging body to fuck large numbers of human-like sexbots with.
Plebbiest of the the plebs.
>>1113855
>Shooting the fifth skeleton
>Not shooting the first, third, and sixth skeletons
>>1115649
You know a self-driving car isn't necessarily 100% automatic, right? A human driver, if there is one, can intervene. He or she can choose between saving his life or those of others, in the second situation.
For the first situation, it depends. Is it someone's private car that they are riding in? Then it is their fault if they get into an accident as they do have the power to intervene when needed. Is it a 100% automated truck being used for some business; carrying freight? Then if it gets in an accident, it is the fault of the company.
>>1113855
will it help advance the cause of a classless society?
>>1148030
no, it will actually stratify classes more distinctly and make human society function far more like an ant hill.
>Expensive upgrades every 4-6 months
>Botnet systems monitoring and data storing your literal thoughts
>Monopolies on both software and hardware making it impossible to buy anything but GoogleHand or Apple iLegs
>Every endeavor being a test of whether or not your have the right tech, and obviously the better the tech the more expensive it is increasing the steepness of the social ladder and making it nearly impossible to do seemingly normal things like get a job without having “transcended”
>Constant fear of being hacked into; some kid in his room can control entire armies of people with the right knowledge.
>>1113888
nice.
>>1113861
are there good arguments for breathing? it's a meme.
every idea that's been around for like 10 years (and has reached a certain amount of people) is a meme. kind of by definition too. anyways, i think nobody else responded to you because you're an obvious troll/bait. i responded because i am drunk.
kill yourself.
>>1120592
>The only people who are allowed to say transhumanism is bad are Mennonites.
What? Do you think we're all amish or something?
>>1114104
The average person today is a lot smart than the average person 100 years ago. We are getting collectively smarter
>>1149884
No, IQ tests just fail as they become common knowledge, the actual collective smartness isn't going up, we are just adapting to taking standardized tests.
>>1114104
t. illiterate druid.
Yeah, it'll turn out like false limbs; crutches over weapons. Best case scenario, some 'Barret-like' (FF7 reference) machine-gun for people with no left hand.
Nerds like it because it looks cool.
I quite like humans, I like being one, and I have no fear of death.
>>1118590
This atleast for people who like horseriding, I like horseriding for instance, I will never own a car, will stick to a good old reliable horseriding for getting around the city
>>1136243
regardless of whether that's true these symptoms wouldn't be experienced by a human who truly transcended meat bag/space anyway.
>>1118275
>Only materialists believe [living "forever"] is possible since they don't believe there is anything supernatural about the brain such as the mind or the soul that can't be replicated through other physical analogues.
>>1126568
>I am not interchangeable with a goddamn biomechanical golem that just happens to look like me.
I think you've both got your ends of the argument backwards.
1. What material that supposedly constitutes yourself would be transferred from your meat brain to a longer-lasting analog in this process? >uh you just plug the full brain into the empty brain and all the electrons that are you go in it's Science
2. What is a Christian's (example) supposed heavenly body their soul experiences the afterlife with, if not some kind of golem?
You can't *materially* replicate the identification of *your* conscious experience with its embodiment in *this* substrate, right? It's inseparable, unless you believe in a soul separate from anything physical, in which case any crazy transhumanist plot's fair game.
Let's assume it's possible to replicate the material conditions or artificially create an analogue suitable for consciousness to inhabit. The two brains (the original and the replica / upgrade) are/contain either:
A. two distinct selves, so no transfer of self possible, or
B. two sets of senses my consciousness experiences together OR one self in the original and the artificial brain is empty of consciousness (and could potentially be filled with it somehow)
A. is a reasonable possibility in a materialistic or partly supernatural universe but B. is impossible in a materialist universe; selves being shared or transferred across analogues or replicas would need non-material, supernatural otherness (souls).
>>1149247
Holy hell you're so fucking dumb it fucking hurts
I swear, knowing that people like you actually roam around the internet while spreading their opinion is terrifying
Not even "lol im drunk" can justify such idiocy
Thinking there won't be people limiting everything, and bitching about fairness for non-augmented people.
>>1118422
Brah look at what the religious nuts on here are saying lmao.
>>1151497
did you get bootyblasted? you're so funny.
nice arguments for anything. come back when you're ready to have a conversation instead of just getting upset because you can't form an argument.
>>1152034
What are your plans? Make people buy your product? I don't think it's as simple as that. An ocular implant isn't going to make anyone buy your brand of toilet paper.
>>1113855
>transhumanism
>not replacing the human with robots all together
>>1130221
beautiful read
>>1140437
>You realize that's for a single invention, not all of technology, right?
You could replace those pictures with cars or airplanes or computers and the implications would still be the same.
The singularity like graphing how high a human has even gone relative to the surface of the planet. For millions of years we were stuck to the ground. Then someone invented the hot air balloon, which made the graph take off at that point. No more than 200 years later we built the first airplanes, and 50 years later we sent the first human into space. Then just a decade after that we landed on the moon. If we were back then, we would look at the progress and say "Woah, the field is huge now! There is so much money being invested and so many smart people working on it that in less than 100 years we will be able to travel to other galaxies!". But it doesn't work that way. The first steps in research are much easier, we will end up hitting a problem that could take a lot of time to solve, or be impossible altogether. That is were AI is now. We improved a lot on techniques that are the best we have now, but they are still too rudimentary compared to strong AI. It is like looking at the Apollo program and saying that if we keep it up we will be traveling faster than light in no time.
>>1151362
That isn't a very subtle bait and switch, uploading your mind doesn't necessarily mean you live forever, computers need resources and can fail, too, it just adds a new level of versatility.
>>1151362
What about C. Piecewise Integration where biological components such and limbs and their correlated brain structures get replaced slowly over time by function with digital counterparts while gradually phasing out the original organic structures?
>>1154062
N-N-N-Nature's Fresh Milk.
