>What's your opinion on transcending humanity and becoming an improved life-form through technological advancement?

Iffy. We don't know how consciousness works, and if it's not the purely materialist-reductionist phenomena you think it is, then sentient machinery will never truly be possible.

>>16107462
Are you new? This is a really obvious troll thread to anyone who has been on /tg/, or even 4chan as a whole, for more than about a month.

>>16107467
Considering that he's having second thoughts about seeing sentience as a purely material phenomenon, he might just be too stupid to spot the OP's intent.

Also, oh yes, a body that doesn't rot off of you. Sign me in. Sage for troll thread.

>>16107517
And I mean it this time.

>NO FUN ALLOWED

I'm not OP and you know what? Fuck trolls. This is an interesting enough subject for me.

I'm picturing a setting where rich people become augmented by technology and poor people (or just people who don't want to become part-machine) become crazy survivalists.

Poor people, naturally evolved into X-Men territory vs rich people with godlike prostethics. Fuck yeah.

I believe that if we have the technology to augment our bodies, we should use it. Mans advantage over other animals has always been the ability to use technology to augment our abilities (we don't have fur to keep us warm so we invent clothes, we don't have sharp teeth and claws so we invent weapons, we don't have wings so we invent airplanes), so augmenting our bodies with technology is the logical next step.

>>16107123
Fuck that shit.

The point of improving our bodies with technology is to make ourselves more human, not less. All of those things you would so casually discard are things that I would use my improved mind and body to enjoy in ways that my baseline fleshmeats could never have imagined.

I'd gradually turn my bits into metal as I grew older and my body couldn't handle it.

But my dick stays.

It all comes down to cost vs reward really.

Is this arm just as good as a biological arm in every way, cheap to instal, and does it have serious advantages over a flesh arm without any side effects? If the answer is yes, then clearly people are going to want to cyberize themselves, especially as they grow older and their biology begins to break down.

Now, how far can we reasonably take this? Who knows. The mind is not a perfect machine, its a massive ball of feedback loops that rarely works with machine-like precision (which is one of the reasons why we use machines). So I think true AI is a long ways off, and a machine that can replace the brain entirely is even farther off. That said, if we can install a computer chip that can store memories perfectly (again without major drawbacks or failure rates), that would be cool as well.

Then there is the cost issue. True augments are not far off, but they are far from cheap at this point in time. How long before this sort of thing is affordable for the common man? I would suspect it will be a while.

OP may be a troll, but his view is what people would likely be afraid off. So we have to be very careful as we progress to not change any essential parts of the human mind without reason. Also, if you actually believe that two perfectly rational people wont be in conflict, your kidding yourself. Each person has a certain viewpoint, and survival and selfishness are very rational on a personal level. Emotions modulate weather the personal is more important than the group need, so be careful when you think about removing emotions from the human condition.

>If you oppose this then you are a threat, a primitive and selfish threat.

people have the right to be scared of what is essentially a fundamental change in what it means to be human

>>16108445
Your dick? How narrow minded.

We're talking full-body augmentation here, and you want to keep something as mundane as a penis? Maybe they can install some creativity subroutines while they're at it.

I am actually a bit supportive towards OP's ideas.
However we would make a mistake for the same model towards all of humanity.
Hence seperate cultures should be established on other space colonies.

WE WILL REMOVE EMOTION; SADNESS; FEAR; HATE. HUMANITY WILL BE UPGRADED. ALL ROGUE ELEMENTS UNWILLING TO BE UPGRADED WILL BE DELETED. DELETE. DELETE. DELETE.

>>16107123

I'm for it.

>>16108651

I, on the other hand, never asked for this.

(The new Deus Ex game actually does seem like a possible near-future, crazy as that seems.)

I'm all for augmentation, but this just doesn't appeal to me. I'm too paranoid to link my mind up to a system. I might like a Person to Person link-up, kinda like the 'sex' scene in Demolition Man.

Transhumanists are racist, classics elitists who believe our problems as a species can be improved simply by adding technology. You know what the first consequence of living forever will be? Nothing will ever change. Culture and politics and the distribution of wealth... power, essentially, will remain in the same hands forever. Violence would then be the only option.

>>16108715
Boom, this.

It's basically the judeo-christian rapture for sad-sack nerds with no elf-insight.

I've never understood the concept of a cyborg workforce. Surely, by the time technology develops that far, our world will be automated to the point that it runs more efficiently without us than it ever could.

We can only hope, at that point, that our creations will for some reason feel obliged to keep us around. Perhaps they'll set aside wildlife preserves for us, or keep us in resthomes.

>>16108715

Brah it's going to come to that anyways.

>>16108759
I really get tired of that comic being posted.

Here's the thing.
I don't think the singularity will fix everything or that it will come anywhere even close to my lifetime. What I do believe is that we can improve ourselves, that we must improve ourselves. That it is our moral duty to be better than we are if at all possible.

I don't give a fuck about the people without electricity. This isn't a game. There is no fairness. There are people in the fucking rainforest that have never had contact with the rest of humanity. Sucks to be them. If one area of the world advances the rest will follow in their own time.

The fact is that transhumanists and futurists want to improve the world and people who post this comic thinking it proves your point just want to be mediocre assholes.

Luddites are one of the absolute worst kinds of people that have ever existed. They think their insistence on being primitives makes them morally superior. You've been losing this battle for a few millenia now. You will be left behind again, just as you always have been.

See you in the future assholes.

>>16108715
Bioconservatives are racist, classist elitists who think that everything natural is always inherently better and that adapting on our own terms is intrinsically linked with losing our souls.

I see the issues that might come from personal augmentation outside of mere prosthetics implanted for medicinal reasons (widened gap between haves and havenots, bigotry. your concerns about the sociopolitical consequences of mass immortality), but the advantages would still be too important to pass up this opportunity.
Transhumanism would enable us to colonize the solar system, would end the suffering caused by a diseased and aging body, would enable us to outperform earlier generations in every way.

That said, i wouldn't go for it unless the technology is proven and initial glitches are fixed. Having to lug around a poorly designed beta model sounds like a really horrible idea if you need surgery to update it.
I'm also fine with my flesh body and would only start replacing large parts of it if it was breaking down.
If these conditions will coincide within my lifetime, i'll be more than happy to take the leap, though.

>>16108815
Shame he right though. The Singularity might happen in the future, just like the rapture might happen in the future. Either way it screws most of the planets population and lets the people who were already good to go continue being good to go. Everyone else gets left behind until they have enough of it and exterminate you or you exterminate them. Transhumanity implies that everyone rolls over and takes it up the ass, but they forget human nature in doing it. We kill each other for stupid shit like which version of the Sky Wizard is the best version of the Sky Wizard. Now we're getting to the issue of you aren't even -human- anymore. Think of the things we do to people, now imagine what we'll do to machine people.

It'll be a massacre.

There is no place in the future, for humanity. We're a stopgap, we're bound to create the next dominant race in this solar system. But there's no way we could ever join our creations. Our bodies are worthless, and our minds are a sort of software on the cusp of obsolescence. It wouldn't be in our creations' best interest to keep us around in any form. We certainly can't be useful to them.

>>16108715
>>16108759
My issue is that it seeks only to deny the possibility of hope. While I certainly don't see a significant evolutionary of civilization-spanning anything in the next century, I am given to the speculation that in the next five hundred years or so there is a necessity for it. Given the curve of population crashes and humanity's stubborn determination to circumvent it, it will come to a point where humanity must progress past the status quo or die. We see this in the nuclear situation- we just need to avoid a worldwide nuclear war to survive, and we have, if sometimes only narrowly. That's how humanity operates- as lazy or fat as the species can be, as a whole we will never be so apathetic as to let ourselves die.

You can argue that by and large, people are scumsucking assholes with no value to a society, and that's true, but the whole 7 billion or so of us are not represented entirely so.

Thusly, I do not see cybernetics becoming a household technology, but like computers, I do see them proliferating heavily.

>>16108539
See this? Despite namefaggotry, this is an honest hypothesis and opinion formed on the basis of knowledge that is more or less just laying around one's brain. In fact, I agree on some points. Yes, we cannot tell exactly how cybernetics will progress or form or come to be, therefore we have several distinct possibilities based on one of three assumptions presented. Yes, the nature of individualism precludes harmony. etc. I don't see Deus Ex quite happening, but then I'm referring to the first game. I'm pirating Human Revolution as we conduct this thread.

Europe: Bioconservative, in a good way~ The Europeans use taxation and regulatory regimes to discourage radical biomods and instead make sure everyone gets the basic genefixes and improvements as part of universal healthcare. They do not allow the manufacture of strong AI's or bioroids, yet they offer full citizenship and sanctuary to such. This line is repeated in the Christian/Muslim Democratic, Green, and Socialist Internationals across the world and is appealing to many boring, regular people who don't want a strange new future.

The United States of America: Clusterfuck; as the conservative Democratic Party guards the increasingly immortal gerontocracy of the super-rich and their medical technology, and the barely regulated industrial slavery of bioroids and strong AI's, and the use of transhuman soldiers - all while openly supporting anti-transhumanist militant evangelical groups across the nation.

The liberal Republicans can't get anything done, as the European style social democratic wing and the libertarian transhumanist wing dominate the party and fight constantly.

Outside of the main power structures, progressive transhumanists and technosurvivalists are gaining power in a populist "People's Choice" movement to create a cyberdemocracy of devolved city-states assisted by partial use of citizens juries in conjunction with regular elected officials, with AI making randomized officials a viable option.

>>16108724
This actually encapsulates how I think it will turn out.

There will be no techno-rapture, and it will be a lot more boring and tedious than people think.

>>16108881

HUMANITY IS FALLING APART.

The political-industrial complex one hand, a monolith of interlocking corporate interests and gerontocrats.

The Third World guerrillas, international terrorists, religious fanatics, back to the landers, racical ecoterrorists, and other barbarians.

You are caught between them and there are only two directions to go: Down, or Up

Up-Wingers are transhuman. They seek to create countless clades of posthumanity among the stars.

Down-Wingers are technosurvivalists. They seek to watch the world burn their enemies away from their bunkers planetside and carved into asteroid belts.

WHO WILL WIN THE FINAL CHAPTER IN HUMANITY'S STORY?

Um, guise?
The human body is a machine of flesh.
Trying to graft or implant it with mechanical bits, while interesting would be a terrible idea. Allow me to explain why:
Maintenance. Tell me, anyone here, have you even scraped your knee? Notice how that heals?
Welp, machines don't do that naturally. There's wear and tear all the damn time with our bodies, and you'd need to take something apart, find and fix the problem and then re-assemble. Now, the common man, as we understand him is not capable of this. Nor will he be for a very long time.
Then there is an issue of redundancy. What happens when you've got something that's become obsolete? Do you undergo expensive surgery to replace it?

The only way we'd be able to modify ourselves is with bio-engineering. Or nanites. Both in the *very* distant future.

As to what makes us human? The intrinsic properties of being an primate of our specific species. Nothing all that exciting or worth frothing at the mouth about, considering that it's our capacity for thought that sets us apart from many animals.
If souls exist, humour me here, supposedly if these things exist, then it shouldn't matter what bits you've replaced or how you live, it should be an intrinsic part of you. If you claim otherwise, then when does one stop having a soul? Is it stored somewhere in specific, like the pancreas?

tl;dr Mechanic grafts are a bad idea, biology ftw, loss of humanity lol, no, doesn't happen.

Heh, Nuclear war, really?
That will never happen. Want me to tell you why? While there might be some nuclear conflict, strongest odds with North Korea right now, nuclear war is simply not profitable enough to exist. It costs too much and yields nothing in return. Besides, everybody would be butthurt like mad about anybody using nukes.
There will be no nuclear conflict until such a time as we start living on other planets. At that point, it's all fair game.

I tend to find it's only those unhappy with their current bodies that go for transhumanism.

So I'm basically calling you a fat speccy-four-eyes, OP.

You know it's a shame, I really like this topic but it's essentially impossible to have a good discussion about it on /tg/.

Quick answer to the OP though. Yeah, I think it's a good idea but not necessarily in the way you propose.

>>16108759
>>16108715
>>16107123

all of these are incredibly overstated views.

The Op has some kind of technocontrol fetish, and Not in a good way. No one is striving for this. Not even Op, because that is a troll post.

No one who has two braincells to rub together expects some kind of Robot-Jesus event, but for some reason this is the first thing that anti-progress mouthbreathers latch onto. Then the same dumb fucking comic is trotted out, and then people reply in the same dumb way.

>side note:
>technology Does trickle down. Just look at all the seemingly destitute african farmers with cellphones and solar panels.
>whats that, a technology "developed for the rich whites" helping third worlders? impossible!?!

>>16109176

>it's essentially impossible to have a good discussion on /tg/.

>>16109034
then is creation of a fully cybernetic body, one must define a soul as what separates a full augmetic from a toaster.
we'd need to transplant clusters of brain-cells into otherwise synthetic beings. we'd be making souls.

>>16109244

Frankly I don't believe anything like a soul exists, so it's a moot point for me. As long as my consciousness is maintained to an acceptable level in any upgrade then I'm fine with it.

But yeah, as far as I'm concerned anything that has sentience above a certain threshold is the same, human or computer or whatever, doesn't matter to me.

>>16108715
And this, ladies and gentlemen, is everything that is wrong with humanity. It is a misinformed slave, kept in the dark by people who wish to control it, reciting the catechisms of "racism" and "elitism" and "wealth" in an attempt to appear similar to the slaves that surround him.

"Simply" adding technology? How much has technology changed our lives in a mere century? A decade?

How much have tired race politics and failed economic religions like communism changed in a century?

You bind yourself to people who do not care for you; a man supping milk from a mother who wishes her son never to grow.

You measure superiority through "love" and "charity" but you don't know what those things mean.

It will not be the gifted, the strong, or the loved who hold humanity back. It will be the spiteful, the weak, and the enslaved.

>>16108715
You'll never see that money anyways quit whining.

>>16109318

A little bit overstated perhaps, but yeah, I can get behind this sentiment.

For myself, I don't really think that hard on it. If something can improve my life I'll go for it. Whether that be buying a video game, upgrading my computer, or upgrading myself, it's all the same thing. I won't do something that directly harms another person, but my first concern isn't helping another person either. I never worry if the money I spend on myself could be better spent on someone else, basically.

Only the weakminded require machines to overcome their base instincts.

People like OP is holding humanity back.

Well. I came in here late.

Y'know, we regularly have this discussion on /sci/ with less trolling and more actual cool dudes with links and timelines.

I'm game for a techno-rapture.
Shit, I'm game for a Biblical rapture.

Just give me something exciting, it has gotten a little boring here lately. I think I'm going to go for a hike this weekend.

>>16109034
uhm, guise?
The body is a living organism with more bugs than Oblivion and I don't see anyone being inclined in releasing a patch any time soon.

Notice how if you for an example eat modern chemically treated food you run a risk of spontaneously developing harmful mutations a.k.a cancer, or how breaking one of your frail bones means months of healing, even more months to rehabilitate and then a moderate risk that unhealed fractures will always make that bone a little weaker than it used to be.
Or what about unregulated emotions? Emotions are the #1 reason for homicide AND suicide.

>>16109404
You mean other people on /sci/ does, because you seem incapable of both discussion or providing links.
You do seem rather adapt at whining and pointing fingers however.

>>16109826

Except when you take away emotions then something else would become the #1 reason for homicide.

Legalized genocide detected.

>>16109404

You guys aren't much better at arguing this topic. It's just a bunch of passive-aggressive ego-stroking, very few actual facts to back it up.

I don't get why people are afraid of losing their "freedom" or their pleasures.

It's ego-centric all of it. The freedom to do what I want, without caring about others, to do what feels good to me, me, me, I and myself.

To upgrade is to belong to a greater good, to go beyond the pesky squabbling, fear and hating that comes with being human.
No more fighting over resources, no more needless violence, and to top it off we'd finally have the physiological means to actually conquer space.

>>16109895

> claims it's egocentric.

Has it occured to you that maybe it's just that we would prefer to keep our positive feelings?

Like humbleness, or mercy.

>>16109895

The biggest issue I have is that this is still technology controlled and distributed by humans.

You talk about all our flaws and then expect us to lay all those aside for this one momentous change, while I'm terrified that someone will manipulate it to FULFILL those selfish goals rather than eliminate them.

>this thread

I can say right now that the biggest reason I'm against this idea of technological instrumentality is my religious beliefs.

I don't like the idea with meddling in the very things that make us human.

I would prefer pitching game ideas related to transhumanism, but if you butts really wanna do this:

Read dis: http://www.changesurfer.com/Acad/TranshumPolitics.htm

and dis: http://www.geneticsandsociety.org/downloads/200703_worldwatch_hayes.pdf

>>16108881

>Implying Glorious North Korean Sky Wizard isn't Best Sky Wizard.

>>16109913
Why?
Why would you need humbleness and mercy when there are no opposite negative emotions any longer?
There would be no humbleness because there would be no pride.
There would be no mercy because there would be no wish for revenge or personal gain.

All would be controlled, regulated, subdued.
There would be no individuals, only one species with a billion limbs all working in unison.

>>16110098
oh troll, you so silly.

I mean, sure, the beast with a million limbs is a kinda kinky idea, but the way You put it is more boring then an ant-farm full of dead ants.

>>16110098

Don't you think you're turning away from the very things that make us human though?

Without our advanced capacity for emotion and self-awareness we're really nothing more than intelligent animals.

>>16109976
I'm not fond of anyone who pitches their ideas by saying "read dis."

>May 17, 2025 (estimate conservatively pulled from ass): Human brain digitized.
>May 18, 2025: First computer virus for human brain OS released into wild.

I'll stay fleshy thanks.

>>16110165
Your argument is based on emotional reasoning, flawed.
Every day we exploit, rape, pillage and murder, we incite hate towards those who stray even the slightest from our personal "moral" guidelines.
Is that what it means to be human? Is that what makes us greater than animals?

No sir, we are animals all the same, beasts with tools.
To strive to leave our primal instincts behind us is nothing but noble.

>>16110165
My answer to you is similar enough that I'll just refer to what I just wrote to the other anon.

>If you oppose this then you are a threat

OP confirmed for psychotic and dangerous to the human race, and is urged to seek mental help at a nearby psychological institute.

Also saged and reported for illegal content. Have a nice day.

I like how every single one of these threads turns into a cyberware jerkfest.
Protip: In the time that bioengineering and cybernetics hit their advent, we'll be looking at so many deviating strains of humanity it'll be lucky we can collaborate at all.

>>16110183
what is a firewall or anti-virus software or a backup disc? not like bios can't get diseases that affect the mind (syphilis) or that they don't suffer from inherent design flaws (Alzheimer's).

>>16110259

Who is this "we" you speak of?

Human society is made up of individuals - we might be part of a greater whole but only because "we" choose to be.

If you choose to be an inhuman nutcase then that's your choice.

If you break the laws of society you cease to have any relevant opinion on the direction society is going in imho.

I can't wait to be a giant, mechanical flying whale with a few extra brains.

Wouldn't this just become like highschool all over again?

The Biomods sit at that table, the Mechanoids sit at that table, the infomorphs sit in that chatroom, the Analogs park their Marauders over there, the Primitives eat their lunch in the school garden...

And I'm still eating my lunch behind the dumpsters with the losers and burnouts.

>>16110276

I hate to be the one to say this, since I actually don't agree with what the OP says (also I think they're a troll) but they do have a point in this regard.

If someone actively opposes what you want to do to improve your life, they're a threat. What would you think if the Amish or some similar group went around bombing power plants and saying all electronics should be destroyed?

OP is my next BBEG.

>>16110435

Yeah, probably, except it's not really a bad thing, and it probably won't happen on Earth. Once we have the ability to radically exceed human limitations there's not going to be any reason to stick around, most groups of heavily modified people will probably leave Earth. Once you're away from here what does it matter what you do? There's enough space for everyone, with orders of magnitude to spare.

If you didn't catch my drift, by Analog I meant people who love technology, just don't want it integrated into themselves. Mech-pilots with armored space suits and medical gadgets and headsets that act as non-integrated external cortexes, with a weak AI demon doing memory searches on archives of everything they experience.

>>16110572
i like that.

>something worthwhile out of this thread.

Wow, we inhertited the minecrafters AND the transhumanist queers? We're like a refuge for autistic people.

>>16110697

I'm not sure you know what autistic actually means.

>>16110319
>what is a firewall or anti-virus software or a backup disc?
And thanks to those things computer viruses are currently never an issue, right?

>not like bios can't get diseases that affect the mind (syphilis) or that they don't suffer from inherent design flaws (Alzheimer's).

The difference being that syphilis doesn't let someone steal all of your confidential info or turn you into a puppet.

>>16110703
Considering most psychologists these days seem to use it as a catch-all term for socially mal-adjusted people of all sorts, I think it fits.

>>16110329
You are fooling yourself, you are just as much a slave under your primal instincts as the rest of us.
You do your best to suppress them, you avoid them or try to build moral arguments against them. But one little push and you succumb to them like everyone else.
Your deep programming, the many signal substances in your brain that tells you what to like and what to dislike. The closest you'll come to controlling them is to either suppress them with drugs and end up hurting yourself with the eventual side-effects, or meditating in order to achieve what I'm advocating, but only for a brief moment before your biological coding overrides your personal wishes.

>>16110722

You're right, there's no need of a disease to do that in the first place, it happens all the time to people already.

Nice strawman version of transhumanism there op

>>16110812
>People have their every deep dark secret stolen from their brains and their bodies controlled from outside all the time

citation needed

>>16110471
A hurrmanity fuck year anti-transhumanist who does false flag trolling in order to get people to hate robots and such?

>>16110908

Really? you've never heard of threats, extortion, slavery, or blackmail? No, they aren't as direct but they're pretty much just as effective and they've been happening for thousands of years.

i've given it some thought and realized that, honestly, if i could be a brain in a jar i probably would be.

>Luddites

>>16110955
Not even close to the same level. All of those things can be resisted. Go watch the second GitS movie some time - that part where the characters do the same thing like three times because some douche is fucking with their robo-brains. That's the kind of thing transhumanists want to make possible. No fucking thanks.

this is an amazing thread.

>>16110969
Interesting comic to post, given that most transhumanists seem to be all about forsaking carnal pleasures.

>>16110969
I liek you.

>>16110969
>trans-humanists

I've noticed there are two different kinds of transhumanists:
1) Soft Takeoff Singularity- know what would be awesome: genetic engineering, nanotechnology, Strong AI, and cyborgization. Let's work towards that future so that our grandchildren's grandchildren will have a life that is slightly brighter than what we have.
2) We will use magic pixie dust to build gods who will technorapture us from all those stupid X-tians, because we are special snowflakes. Post-Scarcity society, Functional Immortality, Reverse the Second Law of Thermodynamics, etc. And it will happen within my lifetime because I'm terrified of death and I'm spiritually malnourished, so I transplant heretical christian concepts formed in the 19th century into technological development.

>>16108445
We can rebuildt it. Stronger, faster, superior in every way.

>>16108596
Why would you use metal? Sheet Metal isn't the best material for prosthetics. Also, if we're talking about one thousand years down-the-lane technology. Surely nanotechnology will have advanced to the point that the differences between mechanical and biotic nanotech would be trivial or nonexistent. At least outfit hypothetical cyborg you with synthetic flesh.
Also I can't tell if you are a troll, or a snobbish, virginal basement-dweller.

>>16111003

It's not nearly as different as you want to believe, and any of them can only be resisted to a certain extent, usually at the cost of your life. People never have as much choice or control as they tend to think and it's incredibly easy to take away.

What it comes down to is that you always have to give something up to get something you want. The possible loss of mental privacy might be too much for some, but it's unlikely anyone will be forced into it, at least not until the point where it's so widespread it's installed at birth. I also doubt there won't be some sort of protections in place, and if they aren't perfect, it's not like we have perfect protections now anyways.

>>16111089

You know, post-scarcity and functional immortality are actually a lot more plausible and close to hand than anything you listed in the other category. There's not really that much we'd need to do to accomplish them compared to strong-AI and high-end nanotechnology. Hell, they very well could happen in our lifetime, since we're already interfacing modern electronics with the human body anyways.

>>16110739

And you know what? I'll take that over cold unfeeling any day. Give me the highs and the lows, not the bland middle ground.

I would personally rather be my own creature than unfeeling.

Also: The idea that 'you are cybernetic, therefore emotions are gone' is kinda bullshit. If we can simulate the human brain to get the synthetics, we can make emotional ones. And somehow I don't think society will EVER go for 'Hey everyone! Give up your emotions and any illusion of free will!'

>>16111137
I can feel the desperation coming off of you.
>IT WILL HAPPEN IN MY LIFETIME! IT JUST HAS TO!

As for post-scarcity. Let's say we have nanofabricators on every home. Let's even assume we've advanced to the point we're we can transmute elements into one another through fusion and fission in a manner that is energy efficient. There are three things that there will always never be enough of: matter, energy, and time. And let's not forget the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics hanging over our heads.

>>16111230
>heat death of the universe

go read The Final Question

>>16111230
I'm curious as to where the snobbery about transhumanism came around; in almost any thread started about the concept, there are always people who begin saying that even as a sci-fi setting or scenario, its the rich white man's wet dream and the people that enjoy transhumanist settings are somehow intellectually/spiritually outmoded and/or desperate.

If not that, then its something ridiculous like some pseudo psycho-analysis over the internet based on someone's escapist hobbies. How pretentious can you be? Then again, this is just a layered instance of 'stop liking what i like'.

>>16111230

I'm not saying it will happen in my lifetime, just that it could. Plus, you're retarded if you think either is a bad thing, honestly. "NO FUCK YOU I WANT TO DIE" is as bad or worse than the other, cynicism taken to a stupid level rather than optimism.

That said, I don't think you really understand how post-scarcity works, if you think it's needs Star Trek style replicators. For example, air is currently post-scarcity. With some big solar collectors in space, energy could be too. With some automated orbital hydroponic farms, food could be too. With some advances in 3D printers, common household stuff could be as well. Post-scarcity doesn't mean there's an infinite supply of everything all the time forever, it just means it's not scarce, that there's enough of it to go around without needing much human labor to provide it.

Same deal with functional immortality for that matter. It doesn't mean you'll never-ever die no-matter-what, it just means you don't have a set end to your lifespan due to biological failure. We already know a lot about the mechanics of aging, we've isolated at least one physical cause, all of which has been done in my lifetime, so it's not unreasonable to think more might be forthcoming in the next 50-60 years.

>>16111306

*Shrug*

I just like cybernetics and AI. They are quite cool. I don't really analyze it much.

>>16111323

Isn't that a pretty poor reason to come down on people who like transhumanism though? It's like saying 'I don't give a shit about religion, I never really think about it, BUT MAN FUCK RELIGIOUS PEOPLE, I HATE THEM' or something?

>>16111350

That was more 'I don't give a crap about either side' than anything else. I don't go about thinking it's pretentious (Always. There are exceptions there) but then again I don't really go about hoping for the singularity either.

>>16111373

Fair enough, my apologies. I assumed you were one of the anti-transhumanist people in the thread.

I think we can agree though that the extremists on both sides are pretty retarded.

>>16107123

>No sadness or Violence

What you hope for is nothing but a dream, Mithos. Discrimination comes from the heart.

Even if people become lifeless beings, nothing will change. Discrimination will continue.

>>16111389

Yeah. Both extremes are more than a little odd. Both the 'Singularity, Rapture, what's the difference?' level of love of it and the 'No trans-humanism for you!' level of hating.

I think it would be very cool if any of that stuff turned up but I'll hope for 'fully functional prosthetic' in my lifetime. Plenty of people in need of a new arm or leg.

>>16111389
>I think we can agree though that the extremists on both sides are pretty retarded.

agreed, with the provision that a goodly portion of the truly out-there extremist trans-humanists are sockpuppets for the anti-progress movement.

>>16111424

You know we're nearly to the fully functional prosthetic thing now eh? They've developed arms which sense the electrical signals and muscle contractions in what's left of an arm and move the fingers and wrist accordingly. Nothing yet for above-elbow ampuations that I know of, however. There is, however, a very new artificial leg for people with above-knee amputations with a powered knee and ankle.

>>16111441

Perhaps but I'm willing to assume Hanlon's razor there.

>>16111454

I know. Hence the hope for full ones. We are that damn close and I have a mate who would love to have two arms again.

>>16111441

Yeah, and although I'd like to believe otherwise I have to image there's some on the other side too.

>>16111454

Oh yeah, also there's a microchip implant being worked on that can bridge parts of the optic nerve that are damaged. From what I understand it's not very far along yet. It can also work on some people that are born blind, though.

>>16111306
I don't know.
Really, anti-transhumanism seems to be coming from people that are healthy as is, not from anyone that actually has real problems with their body. Speaking as someone whose body is basically falling apart with nothing I can even do about it, I not only can't sympathize with these views, but consider them offensive at minimum.

I'm curious about the concept, but I'm also skeptical.

I like the idea of being able to jack my brain into a machine and make it work better, I don't like the idea of said machine-jack being manufactured by a company who sets stringent regulations on what I can and can't do with said machine-jack.

Call me a faggot, but I get kind of uneasy when I buy a product which consumer reports says is the best in the world for my price range, only to find out (1) there's a bunch of features which don't exist on this model and instead get stuck with a bucnh of features I never use, (2) it wears out within 2 years and (3) a newer, shinier one is on the market in three months time which does the smae thing, but 'better'.

I wanna appraise my needs first before I go all wirehead. What do I need, what options are available to me, how can I optimize these options both in the short-term and long term. Short-term, the only prosthetic I need are glasses. Long-term, once my kidneys start to fail or I need a replacement prostate when I turn 50, maybe I'll sing a different tune.

Right now, I'll keep the augmentations in DX3 and Shadowrun

>>16107123
>There will be no sadness and no violence once everyone is upgraded and their emotional filter is installed and rational reasoning is enhanced.
aspie
>New humans would be produced, not born. The primal drive for sex and drugs would be suppressed as those are selfish pastimes.
moralfag
>In case of malfunction or being tampered with, every human will be fitted with neural implants that allows the central computer to override it's actions until personal control is deemed safe again.
uberfascist
>Then we could finally further a unison goal, to spread and improve mankind.
trekkie

Seriously, I'm all about casting away the flawed elements of our biology, but you make George Orwell look like an optimist. Persoanlly, I'm the kind of guy who support the hypothetical ideal of the 'every person has a working nuclear device on them at all times' grant of trust and responsibility. But SERIOUSLY, installing lockout devices on people's brains? I understand the intent, and I admire the pants-on-head retarded willingness to protect, but that is not how we do things.

We want to make things more human and capable of the fullest degrees of autonomy, not force everything and everyone into a scenario where the wrong sense of intent can leave an entire body useless until the appropriated authorities can address the situation. There's just way too many ways that kind of system can backfire in everyone's faces. I don't like it one bit.

>>16111539

I don't think there's many people who would want to buy an Apple made implant, even the most hardcore enhancement fan, really. What we (I guess I am one, really) want is for them to be made, as we more or less know they'll be possible within a few decades, and available at a real level of quality, like what you see in PC parts made with enthusiasts in mind.

>>16107123
>emotional filter
>override it's actions until personal control is deemed safe again.

Yeah no, fuck you.

One does not transcend through shackling himself down. Freedom must be maintained.

If you chain people like that you're not building a better society.

You're building a puppet show where people nod and wave and smile because some program is pulling on their muscles or servomotors or what have you. They're being nice because there is no other option.

It's banal and empty.

>>16108445
my dick and my capacity to produce Mk1 mod0 humans stays, but in an armored shell equipped with point defense lasers and nanorepair bots

IRON WITHIN, IRON WITHOUT.

I'm a damn transhumanist and we do have a problem with the technorapture people who think we'll build gods that can alter the fundamental laws of the universe. Can't we just support the augmentation and improvement of humanity without turning this into a millenialist clusterfuck

>>16108927
>Bioconservative, in a good way

I sure is glad massa gets to determine my destiny for me. Fuck off you socialist-luddite scum.

>>16109895
And I'm guessing you get to decide what the greater good is.

>>16111269
I have, it's a great story. However, it's science FICTION, you retard.

Return from the Stars, Stanislaw Lem, 1961.

>take guidance class to help figure out what to do with my life
>first assignment in guidance class is write paper on anything
>whole reason i'm in guidance is i can't decide on anything
>come on /tg/ since i can't come up with a topic
>see this thread

thank you elegan/tg/entlemen, thank you

>>16108715
the proper term is megalomaniacal specists bent on providing the means to improve the human condition, preferably on a massive scale and in a neo-Marxist fashion that places those willing to work in the furtherance of this eventual future at the top of the modification list, just behind those people who are paying their way into modification through hard capital support of development or self-induction into human experiments

HEY GUISE I TOUCHED MY TAMAGOTCHI'S BUTTHOLE AND HE YIFFED AND I CAME AND STARTED FARTING

AM I A SINGULARITY NOW

>>16108764
the answer is simple, sort of anyways, humans just have to upgrade enough to stay viable as R&D elements and risk-takers (exploration, testing, entertainment/sports/arts)

>>16111691
And this just became the most intelligent and logical post in this entire thread. Congrats!

>>16107123
yeah... I have no intent on 'upgrading' to be a cyberman from Dr. Who.

>>16109318
Ayn Rand fan much? It is still the spiteful, the weak, the willfully ignorant, and the insecure that make our world continue to turn; we, and by we I mean those gifted, strong, loved people who are apparently in the oppressed minority yet control a massively disproportional amount of power (as they always have, I don't see it changing much, nor do I care to see it so, let them play politics and the rest will move on eventually), aren't free of the proles yet.

>>16110165
amusingly, without emotions we also seem to be more likely to become omnicidal maniancs

>>16111840

You know it never ceases to amaze me how people hold this view. The second someone says 'ignorant, spiteful people hold back human progress' someone always trots out Atlas Shrugged or something as counter-evidence. Honestly, objectivism has nothing to do with it, there's plenty of the sort of people we're talking about among the rich and powerful as well as the poor and stupid. Hell, they probably have even more of an impact than the masses, since if it was only the lower classes holding things back it wouldn't matter, since they don't actually have any power in the first place. No, the problem is that there's people everywhere who are more interested in hoarding ideas in order to gather wealth than sharing them to advance everyone quicker, that's the issue.

>>16110722
>implying that there are easier methods than hacking something purported to be one of the most complex computing devices ever known

and I said complex, not powerful; IIRC we already have rigs that can outperform human ability to do raw computing, not quite sure though

I find it sad that with so many geeks and nerds in this thread nobody is aware that emotions are essential for our intellect to function. Those damn old philosophers hurt our way of thinking so damn much by trying to somehow disengage Reason from Emotion.
>Primitives were right

>>16111936

Yep, and have for years. The human brain really isn't that powerful a computing device, just really, really efficient with a killer OS.

>>16111840
>Uses Ayn Rand as an argument
>Objectivism
>Not a retarded troll argument

>>16111913
ah, yeah, I can agree with this, sorry; though the average stock trader can do as much impulsive damage to society as more... I don't know what term I should shoot for, so let's say 'green-eyed opportunity hoarders'

I just get way too many Randies in my usual conversations that the connection is reflexive these days.

>>16111966
>>16111936
It's just not the same thing at all. Comparing the two on "raw computational power" scale makes about as much sense as comparing apple to rocks on a blue to wood scale.

>>16111954

Emotions are necessary to some extent, but they really are separate from reason. They're basically just really fast responses based on our subconscious. They let us process and make decisions quickly based on past experience and have a part in the instinct and stimulus-response parts of our brain, but that's about it. There's nothing special about them, just part of our OS. I don't advocate removing them or anything, that would be silly and likely lead to a non-functional brain. But I also don't think they're the optimal way to help our minds function, and I believe it's possible to do much better. Just not easily, probably not for hundreds of years.

>>16111999
isn't that the point of the comparison?

>>16111996

No worries, I've had to deal with my share of them as well, which may be why I dislike being compared to them so much.

>>16112025
They really are not. The only way they're separate is in a conceptual, imaginary sense. To make a bad analogy, they're separate if you think them in a perfect mathematical world, rather than the real one. Without emotions, the intellect is stunted.

>>16111316
you're forgetting that we have post-scarcity information in the first and second world

oh, and diamonds, we have post-scarcity diamonds

>doesn't get rid of the markets and control mechanisms behind those markets though =_=

Don't you have better things to do than troll /tg/, Skynet?

>>16112025
waitaminute, aren't really fast reactions just complex demonic processes? and don't those demonic processes combine to create more complex rational conclusions?

>implying here that emotional reactions are necessary to higher-order decision-making or something like that

I mean, otherwise you're just making optimal conclusions based off of known and suspected data, which is essentially the same damn thing but the emotions are processing shortcuts IIRC

>>16112070

I agree to some extent, but not completely. Emotions are necessary for our mind to function because they're part of what it's built on, not because they're fundamentally required to HAVE a mind. I believe it would be possible to alter a human brain to work without them, or to construct a mind without them, at least without being so controlled by them. That's all. As for reason being separate I still maintain that it is, at least at the core. What reason is, is just the attempt to understand how the world actually functions and apply that knowledge in an intelligent way. Basically it has more to do with facts and external factors, though some of those may indeed be emotions, yours and others, but examining them with reason is different from simply acting on them.

>>16112133

Yeah, that's pretty much it, as I understand it. It's just that I don't believe emotions are the optimal way to do it, since they influence our decision making process in ways that aren't based off fact or reason much more than they need to for an intelligent, technological entity.

>>16111409
wouldn't discrimination just get worse? Why do we keep the crippled around if we don't have stopgap measures to bring them into a more typical ability to function within society other than because we've constructed a moral argument that insists we should treat each other as equals despite physical or mental failings? other than the fact that it takes fifteen-some years to produce a viable replacement, that is

actually, that's kind of a great argument... except that it breaks down once we get 4d4m&3v3 unless we have the whole brain-uploading/full-body prosthesis thing down by then

>>16112104

Not quite. Diamonds aren't post-scarcity because they still require human effort at every stage to acquire and refine them. Information isn't much different right now, really. An integral part of a resource being post-scarcity is that it doesn't require much human input to produce it compared to how it's used. That's honestly more important to the concept than the amount of it materially available, honestly.

ITT: bunch of people cloaking perceived inadequacies with futurist technobabble while lashing out in anger at anyone who suggests turning into a machine is not the best idea anyone's had since jesus

>> a upper class skinny white boys wet dream

thats about it, half the world doesn't even have a computer let alone internet let alone high speed cloud aweness.

Secondly, why do you get to decide everything is primitive and selfish again. Who elected you chairman? Oh yeah, white boy wet dreams.

>>16112196

Possibly, but one of the reasons we discriminate against people is because we're used to resenting people who use resources we need if they aren't producing anything. It's primitive, but it's the truth. If their existence didn't negatively impact us, for example if we had a post-scarcity culture, then that might not be the case. Especially if we aren't being controlled by emotion anymore.

tl;dr it doesn't matter if discrimination comes from the heart if our hearts are under our full, conscious control.

>>16112222
they can be grown for less cost and greater quality than exploiting kimberlite zones via third-world atrocities

>fml diamonds are still expensive as all fuck

I have a huge hate-on for DeBeers. It's completely irrational at this point, but I can't make myself care enough to stop.

>>16112236
>>16112250

You guys didn't read the thread did you? Those old troll attempts have been trotted out like, half a dozen times at least in this thread alone. If you're going to try to piss people off at least put in the effort to see what those who came before you have already tried.

>>16112270

I wasn't aware we could grow actual jewelery quality ones yet, I thought they were still limited to industrial applications?

>>16112287
And they got you good every time.

>>16109318
I rest my case.

>>16112287
they're either more trolls or just getting into the top lines of the thread, either way just respond normally if they've said something new or ignore them

>>16112307
wait, aren't industrial quality gems of higher quality than jewelry-quality?

>>16112312

Nah, I look on trolling attempts as an opportunity to solidify my beliefs and increase my knowledge. After all, if I can't refute a troll then I clearly don't know enough about the subject I professed an opinion on, and I should therefore learn more about it. Basically once they get down to the stage >>16111691 was at I know I've won, since there's no more that can be said against my position.

rolled 100 = 100

>>16110739

> half an hour later he responds.

Sry, i was reading rulebooks.

As for your commentary on meditation i find it amusing that you would have such a problem with it.

Sounds to me like someone doesn't know the trick to calm their mind and become one with the universe.

Shame I didn't see this thread earlier. I would've saged it.

>>16112330

From my understanding it's that jewelery quality gems need to be much larger and all of one piece, since industrial ones are mostly just used for cutting and grinding by taking small pieces and attaching them in large quantities to the edges of saws or sanders or what-have-you. Often in the form of dust or sand-like particles.

>>16112350
>he thinks he won an internet argument
>no point was put forth
>no point was proven
>detractors called ignorant and stupid, dismissed out of hand despite having valid ethical, philosophical and value-based concerns that were not addressed at all
:V

>>16112350
>you've "won"

technically you've won just by bringing them into any cogent argument for any period of time regardless of the outcome if you goal was to improve the truthiness of your ideas and ideals

>tl;dr people don't understand when i say trolls are an educational experience

however, these ones haven't said anything new that hasn't yet been refuted or shown to be juvenile, so there is very little to gain by engaging them at this point

>>16112383
ah, so we're stuck with the fixed market on pretty pieces of vitrified dirt still?

>fml, I really hate the diamond market

I prefer sapphires, IIRC that shit is made of aluminum!

>>16112385

Well, for one thing I'm not the only person posting in this thread, and I don't care about winning in the eyes of others. I only care about satisfying my own need for internal coherence in my beliefs. If I see someone who disagrees with me, troll or otherwise, it gives me something to think about on the subject. If I already have an answer in myself, I post it to see if they have any reply that could, again, make me think. If not, good, my beliefs stood up again. If they do, good, I've come to question a less-than-solid area of my belief, and can once again try to find a new balance.

The 2010 Western Australian storms were a series of storms that travelled over south-western Western Australia on 21 and 22 March 2010. One of the more intense storm cells passed directly over the capital city of Perth between 3:30pm and 5:00pm on Monday 22 March 2010. It is the costliest natural disaster in Western Australian history, with the damage bill estimated at A$1.08 billion.

The storms brought extensive hail, strong winds and heavy rain, causing extensive damage to vehicles, property and trees, and flash flooding, as well as the first significant rainfall in Perth since 20 November 2009. The hail stones are the largest ever known to have occurred in Perth and were around 3 cm (1.2 in) – 6 cm (2.4 in) in diameter, which caused extensive damage to property across the city, including schools, hospitals, universities and power infrastructure. Wind gusts were recorded at around 120 km/h (75 mph). At the peak, around 158,000 homes in Perth, Mandurah and Bunbury lost electric power. Telephone lines were cut to thousands of homes until the next day, and the storms led to an estimated A$200 million worth of insurance claims within three days, with $70 million within the first 24 hours. It was identified as the most expensive natural disaster in Western Australia's history, and was declared a natural disaster by the Premier, Colin Barnett, allowing federal and state funds to be appropriated for disaster relief.

The storm brought an end to a lengthy dry spell in Perth, with 40.2 millimetres (1.58 in) of rain falling at Mount Lawley — the fifth highest daily rainfall recorded for a March day in Perth. Over half of this fell in just 10 minutes.[3] This was the first significant rainfall since 20 November 2009; only 0.2 millimetres (0.01 in) had fallen in the entire period. It was similar to storms which struck Melbourne, Victoria on 6 March 2010.

>>16112427
>>16112403
pretty much this

>>16112436

Is this relevant to the thread?

I stopped paying attention two hours ago.

>>16112422

Most markets are pretty stupid if you get right down to it, there's almost none that have a real correlation between value and price. They're more an evil we have to put up with until someone finds a way around them, because I'm certainly not smart enough to do it.

On the other hand once you have a reasonable income and knowledge of your countries financial policy it's pretty trivial to make them work for you. I only make about $50,000 a year (In Canada, not bad but not great) and I have everything I could ever want in the world delivered to my door, so it works well enough for me.

>>16110697
>inherited transhumanist queers
>implying this isn't a fuck-old troll on /tg/

>>16112146
>Emotions are necessary for our mind to function because they're part of what it's built on, not because they're fundamentally required to HAVE a mind. I believe it would be possible to alter a human brain to work without them, or to construct a mind without them, at least without being so controlled by them. That's all. As for reason being separate I still maintain that it is, at least at the core. What reason is, is just the attempt to understand how the world actually functions and apply that knowledge in an intelligent way. Basically it has more to do with facts and external factors, though some of those may indeed be emotions, yours and others, but examining them with reason is different from simply acting on them.
Well, it's completely useless to talk about this if you don't know the latest neurosciences theory. For now, the only sentient beings we know are biological beings established on an emotional base. I don't say it's not possible to make an intellectual being without emotions but... Well, we don't know one.

>>16113223
And once we find and/or create it's bound to be kinda weird and/or scary as all getout

I find the lack of Therians in this transhumanism thread disappointing.

>>16114799
AdMech here, Therians are smalltime, they don't even the Omnissiah.

I like the idea of transhumanism. Not because humans are flawed, but because we are limited. There's only so much we can do. With upgraded bodies, we'd be able to accomplish SO MUCH MORE. Longer lives, stronger, faster bodies, and the upgrades would only get better over time. With enough effort and research put into this, humans could become unstoppable.

Do you Luddites seriously think you are going to turn down perfection when it becomes available to you?
I doubt it.

"Wanting to improve as a person is a silly rich white dream" is not much of an argument and you fuckers know it.

The less stupid shit you say now, the less of an idiot you will feel like when you get enhanced with the rest of us.

>>16115100
Go to bed Krys.

>>16114909
Try finishing your sentences first. Anyway, AdMech are small time. Do they have a near unparalleled grasp over the known universe? Do they get to lounge around living however the fuck they want? Can they create entire worlds out of interstellar material?

I thought not.

>>16114945
Except by, you know, anyone else who did the same.

>>16115100
>He thinks machines are perfect and the worth of a person lies in how much of them they can get replaced by something else.

>There will be no sadness and no violence once everyone is upgraded and their emotional filter is installed and rational reasoning is enhanced.
Meaning your ability to choose will be taken away.

>New humans would be produced, not born. The primal drive for sex and drugs would be suppressed as those are selfish pastimes.

>I have never had sex, therefore it is something to be abolished.

>In case of malfunction or being tampered with, every human will be fitted with neural implants that allows the central computer to override it's actions until personal control is deemed safe again.
Because, as we all know, those couldn't be tampered with as well.

>Then we could finally further a unison goal, to spread and improve mankind.
No, what you suggest is spreading a bunch of fleshy, or semi-fleshy, or formerly fleshy machines that have forsaken what makes them human so that they can become part of a collective unit.

Transhumanism, from what I've gathered, is a philosophy of the weak. You have no power in life, and you pray that technology would change that for you, rather than looking at why you're powerless. And you're weak willed, because you want things to make your choices and actions for you, and want to give up what makes you a person to belong.

>>16115100
Meh, we don't really care what kind of a fuss they put up, we don't mind the hypocrisy because we need buddies to play some good ol' Tesla Wars IRL after the upgrades go through

Damn, too late. Discuss it on /sci/, where it belongs. Closed.

>>16115225
Also
>lack of emotions equals superior rationality
this i doubt heavily