Ageing

[Palimino]

Immortality.
You are assuming immortality in organic bodies. IMO it will come about in a different way. Downloading consciousness into software. No mess, no fuss. Godlike powers available. Solitude or ruling millions (whatever your power trip). No need for the usual organic drivers (hunger, fatigue, illness, sex) unless you want it. All that is required is a stable power supply and robust hardware. These issues will be made fool-proof.

 

[Palimino]

ud prefer to live as a can opener? and even so how do you think that we should get all of this together? conciousness transfer from brain to machine, even if it is physically possible, would be far more complex than even teleportation. how do you think that we would be able to do this even in this millennium, if we can't even find out the properties of one single hydrogen atom, nevermind 100 billion braincells, each one far faster, storing 100x more data than the best pc's out there today?

my position is that we should rather simply sort out the biological processes, by either brain-transplants (we are already repairing spinal cords and transplanting, reconnecting nerves sucessfully), or by fixing/sorting the repair processes (we are already working on nanotech to differentiate and analyze individual cells, ie cancer tech also has much success in this).

my2R

Personality downloading is a great deal more easy than ‘brain transplants’. The limitation is current hardware. Experiments using the Internet with individual sites/machines playing the part of neurons etc. have taken place for AI. It is not nearly complex enough – incredibly stupid and slow – about level with a retarded insect. The issue with the ‘wetware’ interface seems to be the way humans communicate and think (not at all like machines).

The drivers for software constructs are greater as well. This is not simple immortality, but a method of solving the world’s problems. A ‘gestalt’ of human minds and computers is a very powerful entity. What about if all computer users world-wide can loan their minds (via the Internet) to a ‘group’ mind to solve prickly problems? The mind is simply information (current thinking) and can be expressed as such. Incredibly complex information nonetheless but the limitations appear to be hardware (something that can be overcome).

World’s problems? Isn’t that an exaggeration? Not at all. Time is the issue. For example:

Real time = what we experience subjectively in the world.
Construct time = what an ‘uploaded’ consciousness experiences as sentient software.

A software ‘construct’ can execute (run) as fast (or as slow) as the hardware allows. Theoretically, construct time until the death of the universe can run in one second of real (subjective) time. A group of top minds, in combination with computers and with the enhanced communications between each other and with machines, with billions of years of construct time to work in. I don’t think there are many problems that can withstand an assault like this.

There are more and other motivations (and funding) driving downloadable personalities rather than a simple ‘brain transplant’, which has many hassles, dangers and limited funding. With the ‘downloadable’ option you get much more bang for the buck. Immortality is a by-product.

 

[Palimino]

Personality downloading is a great deal more easy than ‘brain transplants’. The limitation is current hardware. Experiments using the Internet with individual sites/machines playing the part of neurons etc. have taken place for AI. It is not nearly complex enough – incredibly stupid and slow – about level with a retarded insect. The issue with the ‘wetware’ interface seems to be the way humans communicate and think (not at all like machines).

The drivers for software constructs are greater as well. This is not simple immortality, but a method of solving the world’s problems. A ‘gestalt’ of human minds and computers is a very powerful entity. What about if all computer users world-wide can loan their minds (via the Internet) to a ‘group’ mind to solve prickly problems? The mind is simply information (current thinking) and can be expressed as such. Incredibly complex information nonetheless but the limitations appear to be hardware (something that can be overcome).

World’s problems? Isn’t that an exaggeration? Not at all. Time is the issue. For example:

Real time = what we experience subjectively in the world.
Construct time = what an ‘uploaded’ consciousness experiences as sentient software.

A software ‘construct’ can execute (run) as fast (or as slow) as the hardware allows. Theoretically, construct time until the death of the universe can run in one second of real (subjective) time. A group of top minds, in combination with computers and with the enhanced communications between each other and with machines, with billions of years of construct time to work in. I don’t think there are many problems that can withstand an assault like this.

There are more and other motivations (and funding) driving downloadable personalities rather than a simple ‘brain transplant’, which has many hassles, dangers and limited funding. With the ‘downloadable’ option you get much more bang for the buck. Immortality is a by-product.

Hypothetical conversation between the ‘real-world’ and a ‘construct’.

Real World = “And if you could look at items like world peace and...”

Construct = “Here you are. Took 1000 years to sort out. We also addressed pollution – that took 200 years. We have uploaded the plans into the machines of world leaders. Tell them they are there. We have problems with power supplies and security that we need implemented. The plans are on your machine.”

Real World = “Uh...thanks.”

 

[Palimino]

...a simple and feasible brain transplant would be.

????

simply put: brain downloading is light-years ahead of brain transplant...

That’s what I said.

Do you have any idea what a task scanning the brain alone would be?

Of course, scanning a brain would be difficult. A HUGE amount of information. But that’s all it is – information. The hardware doesn’t exist yet (I never claimed it did). Probably a new computing paradigm would be required – humans don’t interface well with the binary computing model. As well, the limits are being reached with current technology. Moore (a past CEO of Intel) had a law named after him (Moore’s Law) because his predictions were so accurate. He claimed that there would be a doubling every 2 years of the number of transistors in VLSI chips (chip density would increase). Around about 2015 chip density will be such that quantum effects (and the speed of light) will impact significantly on very large scale integrated chips (not to mention thermal effects). This will be the major driver for new computing models. Old binary software will run in an ‘emulator’ mode.

... and even so, would you really be transferring consciousness when you copied it...

This is metaphysical. Years worth of arguing and nitpicking by religious fundamentalists and philosophers about souls ‘n stuff.

 

[Phronesis]

Morality is not such a factor, or even a very minute one, only concern is that we don't want to harvest SENTIENT human beings, that is the one and ONLY concern.

Really irritating when people say that, cloning is 'immoral' because it would 'change what it means to be human' - who really cares?

Humans care.

Yes it will certainly become possible within our lives, if not even in the next decade alone, problem is when will society become reason minded enough to get over fairy tales, Hollywood, the immature comparison to Frankenstein, or the typical religious folk who think that stem-cells are people too.

Problem with this poo-poo generalization is that there are people, irrespective of religious or irreligious backgrounds, that are still reason minded enough to be sceptical of transhuman ideas... and they know the difference between an egg and an embryo.
Hopefully you are aware of the difference between an egg and an embryo by now...

What we will also need is to remove the brain of the host body at still a fetus stage. we already can successfully remove exactly half the brains of schizophrenic patients, the skull fills up with spinal fluid and the body continues to function normally.

Good grief thank goodness you will never be near any lab.

There has also been successfully grown and born headless clones www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,138483,00.html and their organs were also completely normal, or perhaps we could simply remove the regions of the brain which denotes sentience, we should do this before the fetus becomes a baby and sentient.

You are going to have to have to scientifically elaborate on what exactly sentience is and where it starts.

Or perhaps, same as the headless clones were grown, we could remove simply the sentinece determining area in the embroic stage, and thus the clone also grows comple

You are assuming there is a "sentience determining area".

Perhaps we could even get the artificially grown body to grow at a much faster pace by using some kind of protien, Human Growth Hormone already spurs the process a bit.

As well as acromegaly.

Perhaps it's very simple, we could simply drug or somehow get the brain in a permanent sleep state, where it only focuses on basic bodily functions, this should also work.

Sure thing, pop in over and you be the first test subject. Nothing to lose and nobody cares after all right?

Then again, Nuclear technology is far more dangerous, and far more difficult to handle too, however it is running perfectly all across the globe. We have not said no to nuclear tech, and i see absolutely no reason to say no to something as great as this either.[/quote] Frankly, you see absolutely no reason to say no to anything.

palimino,

downloading or transfering conciousness from one brain to another or machine brain, is FAR FAR FAR, a more complex task than a simple and feasible brain transplant would be.

Yes, because we have done both, and from experience, brain transplants are less complex .

ie. you can'r transfer conciousness alone if you don't at very least have the same tech to do a brain transplant.

Then again.... we don't really know what consciousness is and whether it can even be computed.

all a brain-transplant entitles, is connecting up the spine and the twelve nerves on each side of the brain. the rest has already been successfully done in a few experimentations and is being done in daily medical procedures too. basically all we need is to fully correct spinal cord damage, and the rubik is solved

Yes... and that should reboot you back into reality... cough... consciousness. You first.

Do you have any idea what a task scanning the brain alone would be? and even so, would you really be transferring consciousness when you copied it, or would this be a depressed clone of you in the body of a toaster? huh, i don't get the logic

Do you have any idea how many nerves you have to perfectly reconnect?

Real time = what we experience subjectively in the world.
Construct time = what an ‘uploaded’ consciousness experiences as sentient software.

A software ‘construct’ can execute (run) as fast (or as slow) as the hardware allows. Theoretically, construct time until the death of the universe can run in one second of real (subjective) time. A group of top minds, in combination with computers and with the enhanced communications between each other and with machines, with billions of years of construct time to work in. I don’t think there are many problems that can withstand an assault like this.

There are more and other motivations (and funding) driving downloadable personalities rather than a simple ‘brain transplant’, which has many hassles, dangers and limited funding. With the ‘downloadable’ option you get much more bang for the buck. Immortality is a by-product.

Sentient software? What is sentient?

Here is a question for you two dreamers. When we as a human race have successfully created sentient software, do you think these sentient software buddies will ever come to the conclusion they were not created or designed? After all, they can reason right?

 

[Palimino]

Sentient software? What is sentient?

From Dreamer #1 to Chief Luddite.
In the context of this post ‘sentient software’ is the software ‘image’ of the downloaded personality. Close family, friends and the construct cannot detect any difference. The ‘Turing Test’ (an AI test) is far too primitive to be an indicator. The construct is far more sophisticated.

...do you think these sentient software buddies will ever come to the conclusion they were not created or designed? After all, they can reason right?

Of course they can! In addition, they would be far more clued-up than organic humanity (not some type of servant). They would, more likely, regard humanity with the same affection as a loved pet. Intellectually, compared to them, humanity would be similar to an amoeba. The only (short term) advantage humanity could offer, is the ability to interact with the physical world and build stuff for them. Organic humanity will be the servants. An organism comprising some of the finest human minds, that can network together as a ‘gestalt’, tied-in to 1000’s of networked computers to handle the basic stuff like memory, calculations and associated donkey work. Such an organism will be extremely alien and the output of such an organism will not even be comprehensible by a single human mind. After the ‘constructs’ become independent of human effort (and they will) there will be no reason tying them to humanity (except weak historical ties). They will have no intellectual equals amongst humanity (do you consider your dog or cat an intellectual equal? Even if you love them?) and nothing in common. Interests will diverge. I suspect that remaining humanity will opt for the ‘construct’ evolutionary route (except for Luddites).

We [humanity] just needs to get there [to wetware] before the declining education standards chop us off at the knees.

 

[Phronesis]

From Dreamer #1 to Chief Luddite.

Hey, I don't oppose technical change .

Of course they can!

Do you think that conclusion will be the truth, rational or even logical? They were after all.... designed/created.

 

[Geriatrix]

Brain transplants. Reminds me of Robocop. And remember brains are still a collection of cells subject to aging and decay so transplants may not necessarily be useful.

I'm not sure what to make of the Transhuman concept myself. But it does seem to be unavoidable.
What would be interesting is to see how our brains, conscious awareness and general behavior would react to the enhanced abilities and perceptions beyond what humans naturally encounter. Like for instance access to multiple visual feeds, audio feeds and maybe even memory and computational enhancements.
Would you still feel and act "human"?

 

[Palimino]

Brain transplants. Reminds me of Robocop. And remember brains are still a collection of cells subject to aging and decay so transplants may not necessarily be useful.

I'm not sure what to make of the Transhuman concept myself. But it does seem to be unavoidable.
What would be interesting is to see how our brains, conscious awareness and general behavior would react to the enhanced abilities and perceptions beyond what humans naturally encounter. Like for instance access to multiple visual feeds, audio feeds and maybe even memory and computational enhancements.
Would you still feel and act "human"?

It’s not only immortality where the human coded as information is important. It has applications for Faster Than Light (FTL) travel as well – a lot faster. Einstein proved that matter cannot exceed the speed of light. In quantum physics (I am a bit muddled as to detail) they (Stephen Hawking – A Brief History of Time - I no longer have my copy [a pox on careless brothers-in-law]) and other quantum physicists have found that the direction of ‘spin’ of an electron is instantaneously (FTL) influenced by the ‘spin’ of a similar electron. They don’t know why (just that it is). This has huge ramifications for FTL travel. It does not contradict Einstein’s theory because it is not matter but INFORMATION that travels FTL. Clockwise and anti-clockwise spin can be easily translated to binary (computer language) or whatever finally results. And what is a human (or anything)? A huge mass of extremely high density information, that maps all matter. This implies that if humans can be specified (mapped) as information (possible, but not with current computing power - it is a LOT of information) they can travel FTL to anywhere as information, to be reconstructed as humans (by the Reconstructor-O-Matic – still to be invented) at their destination. Your atoms would be different, but you would be identical in all respects to the ‘you’ that started the trip. Travel would initially be slow and dangerous until the reconstructor receiver was in place, than it would be instantaneous.

Hyperdrive is so yesterday.

Would you still feel and act "human"?

What is human? It’s an elastic definition. If you feel human, you are. The cavemen of several million years ago were also human. Things have changed since then and you are still human.

 

[Geriatrix]

It’s not only immortality where the human coded as information is important. It has applications for Faster Than Light (FTL) travel as well – a lot faster. Einstein proved that matter cannot exceed the speed of light. In quantum physics (I am a bit muddled as to detail) they (Stephen Hawking – A Brief History of Time - I no longer have my copy [a pox on careless brothers-in-law]) and other quantum physicists have found that the direction of ‘spin’ of an electron is instantaneously (FTL) influenced by the ‘spin’ of a similar electron.
Hyperdrive is so yesterday.

Quantum entanglement suggest you'd simply make a copy though. So there'd be two of you. A-la the fictional teleporter from the movie The Prestige. Which one would be you? Both? Neither...? Hmmmmmm.

What is human? It’s an elastic definition. If you feel human, you are. The cavemen of several million years ago were also human. Things have changed since then and you are still human.

To be human is to be limited to experience realty from a human frame of reference with human limitations and abilities(based on your body).
That is the reason you're not a crab and don't feel like a crab. You don't have crab needs, abilities and limitations(based on your body).
Thus once you drastically change your abilities, limitations and maybe even experience of time, would you still relate with other "plain vanilla" people?

 

[Palimino]

To be human is to be limited to experience realty from a human frame of reference with human limitations and abilities(based on your body). That is the reason you're not a crab and don't feel like a crab. You don't have crab needs, abilities and limitations(based on your body).
Thus once you drastically change your abilities, limitations and maybe even experience of time, would you still relate with other "plain vanilla" people?

According to your logic:
Human = see and hear in a limited spectrum in a disease-prone body that ages into a mewling, senile carcass in diapers, unable to recognise own children. Limited in their ability to influence their environment. Only have 5 senses.

Trans-human (construct) = see and hear across all spectrums, never get sick in an immortal existence (live forever) with Godlike powers and extra senses. Can redefine yourself at a whim.

Hmmmmm. Difficult one that.

... would you still relate with other "plain vanilla" people?

Would you still want to? What will you have in common? Would "plain vanilla" people want to retain their flavour rather than joining you? How many have to be plain vanilla to retain their identity as the template which defines ‘human’? If enough become trans-human, wouldn’t they define the new benchmark for ‘human’?

 

[Geriatrix]

Hmmmmm. Difficult one that.

Umm, I'm not saying one is preferable to the other. All I'm saying is that you wouldn't necessarily be human any more.

Would you still want to? What will you have in common? Would "plain vanilla" people want to retain their flavour rather than joining you? How many have to be plain vanilla to retain their identity as the template which defines ‘human’? If enough become trans-human, wouldn’t they define the new benchmark for ‘human’?

Probably not. That's my point.

 

[Palimino]

.

All I'm saying is that you wouldn't necessarily be human any more.

Would you still want to? What will you have in common? Would "plain vanilla" people want to retain their flavour rather than joining you? How many have to be plain vanilla to retain their identity as the template which defines ‘human’? If enough become trans-human, wouldn’t they define the new benchmark for ‘human’?

Probably not. That's my point.

Contradiction! In the 1st quote your definition of human is organic (you wouldn’t be ‘human’ if you went the construct route). In your 2nd quote you say it doesn’t matter.

 

[Palimino]

Transhuman could also might as well as be my cellphone. it's got 10 senses, lets see, bluetooth, wifi, 3g, camera, accelerator, campus, gps, microphone, touch-screen, thermometer. so why don't we turn ourselves into cellphones?

really why do we need to see and hear across all spectrum? oh lol x-rayy vision

You are setting-up a Strawman argument. People are not cell phones and will never be. Don’t be ridiculous!

 

[Geriatrix]

Contradiction! In the 1st quote your definition of human is organic (you wouldn’t be ‘human’ if you went the construct route). In your 2nd quote you say it doesn’t matter.

Sigh.
Go read my posts again.

1st quote says

All I'm saying is that you wouldn't necessarily be human any more.

I said that in my opinion going the transhuman route would not necessarily still make you human. I didn't say if that was good or bad. I don't know if it would be.

2nd quote says

Would you still want to? What will you have in common? Would "plain vanilla" people want to retain their flavour rather than joining you? How many have to be plain vanilla to retain their identity as the template which defines ‘human’? If enough become trans-human, wouldn’t they define the new benchmark for ‘human’?

Probably not. That's my point.

That says that in my opinion a transhuman being wouldn't necessarily want to relate with normal human beings anymore. I didn't say if its good or bad. I also didn't say it doesn't matter.

You where the one asserting that it would be better.

Human = see and hear in a limited spectrum in a disease-prone body that ages into a mewling, senile carcass in diapers, unable to recognise own children. Limited in their ability to influence their environment. Only have 5 senses.

Trans-human (construct) = see and hear across all spectrums, never get sick in an immortal existence (live forever) with Godlike powers and extra senses. Can redefine yourself at a whim.

Hmmmmm. Difficult one that.

What exactly go you so worked up?

 

[Palimino]

What exactly go you so worked up?

What confuses me is that you keep waving around a definition of human and comparing stuff to that. It’s like a religious zealot quoting the bible at an atheist to ‘prove’ his point. The atheist is WTF?

... not necessarily still make you human.

... normal human beings anymore.

What is human? What you say it is? Is there some , generally available, benchmark for human?

 

[Geriatrix]

What confuses me is that you keep waving around a definition of human and comparing stuff to that. It’s like a religious zealot quoting the bible at an atheist to ‘prove’ his point. The atheist is WTF?

FFS, I merely said that in my opinion being human is to have a human body and experience the world through what the human body alllows. Whats wrong with that? Am I not allowed my own opinion of what being human is!?
Why don't you try and explain to me why you disagree instead of getting all huffy?
Isn't this forum here to discuss ideas?

What is human? What you say it is? Is there some , generally available, benchmark for human?

I don't know, you tell me what you think. I gave you my opinion and you almost blew a fuse. Whats YOUR opinion of what it is to be human?

 

[Palimino]

Why don't you try and explain to me why you disagree instead of getting all huffy?

I have. You don’t listen.

What is human? What you say it is? Is there some , generally available, benchmark for human?

I don't know, you tell me what you think. I gave you my opinion and you almost blew a fuse. Whats YOUR opinion of what it is to be human?

The definition of human is always changing and evolving. By your definition those with glasses, hearing aids or artificial legs are no longer human because they experience the world through enhanced senses to what the human body allows them.

 

[Geriatrix]

I have. You don’t listen.

I missed that then. Where did you say what you think being human is?

The definition of human is always changing and evolving. By your definition those with glasses, hearing aids or artificial legs are no longer human because they experience the world through enhanced senses to what the human body allows them.

Ah good, an actual conversation.
Yes good point, but remember hearing aids and artificial legs are corrective devices trying to emulate the human body. What happens when you start having access to senses, "limbs" and ways of experiencing stimuli that are not an emulation or simple extension of some part of the human body?

Lets have a thought experiment.
For instance, imagine your brain was somehow directly connected to a server which was networked to make it possible for you to look through all the thousands of cctv cameras and any other cameras within a city. All at the same time. And hear through millions of microphones, phones and vibration detecting devices spaced through out the city. And you can experience the pressure of movement through all the step counters in a cities malls. All at once.

Intitially if would be jarring and overwhelming but I think the brain would somehow try and make sense of it and try to make an internal spacial model of these millions of sense impressions to try and relate them to each other, just like it does with our current senses. Just like babies who have to learn hand-eye coordination and spatial orientation.

Now imagine you have full mental control of all the movements of automated things in the city. Things like traffic lights, bridges, trains and maybe even air traffic directions. You're learning to walk in a sense. After a while you can change their states as easily as you can move a finger.

Now you experience all these things as if it was a distinct internal part of you, not channeled through your usual human limbs or body parts via a keyboard or a screen and speakers(thus through your human eyes and ears).

Once again this is simply my opinion, but I think it would be difficult not to feel like you are the city. I don't think you'll feel like a human being controlling a city from a remote location.

I say this because you will be able to feel the movements and vibrations, see the locations and hear the sounds as a interconnected spacial whole inside your minds eye and you would be able to control things through thought as if where part of your body.
So can you feel like human being and a city at the same time?
What do you guys think?

 

[Palimino]

I missed that then. Where did you say what you think being human is?

Try not to (it becomes tedious). It helps to read the posts. I have always maintained that the definition of being human is flexible (not rigid, locked into a particular timeframe). It ranges from stone age humans through heart & liver transplants, glasses, artificial limbs, etc. They are still human.

Ah good, an actual conversation.
Yes good point, but remember hearing aids and artificial legs are corrective devices trying to emulate the human body. What happens when you start having access to senses, "limbs" and ways of experiencing stimuli that are not an emulation or simple extension of some part of the human body?

So then, would it be OK to use binoculars, night vision apparatus or levers – things which augment existing senses or strength, as long as they are not part of the body? As soon as **any** augmentation of the organic body is embarked upon, it is an abomination of God’s plan and the augmented person is no longer human.