Reality & Truth

Discussion in 'IntroSpectrum' started by Yahunyahti, Aug 26, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. menaz

    menaz Avant Garde

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2004
    Messages:
    16,807
    Ghet, wouldn't Transhumans be the only possible biotechnology able to with- stand the effects of time trivial, given the Aging process that may occur during retrospective or future trivialing?
    test
  2. No.

    Review Apoptosis
    test
  3. menaz

    menaz Avant Garde

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2004
    Messages:
    16,807
    Azeus it is nothing like that at all. You seem to be a very visual leaner to me.

    To visually understand nanobots watch the history channel rerun of "Universe searching for ET". Stupid name, but the documentary wasn't. We are not talking about Terminator-like cyborgs.
    test
  4. menaz

    menaz Avant Garde

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2004
    Messages:
    16,807
    I already know about Apoptosis.

    I spoke on it here... "While the T-cells of no use in challenging the present onslaught are deprived of nourishment, of the adeptness to procreate, and often of extence itself. By way of, apoptosis, a pre-programmed cell death."


    So you think even being transhuman apoptosis is still a reality which nanobots can't slow down the cellular death rate of? Therefore, Aging will still occur, older to younger depending on past or future traveling? Thus, Still the organism malfunctions.
    test
  5. Apoptosis is a requirement for development. Without it, we wouldn't have fingers or toes.

    We would need more than just a blanket prevention of apoptosis.

    But apoptosis is one of the most important factors of prolonging life biologically.

    Next up is correcting DNA repair errors during mitosis. The other is preventing toxic build-up.

    This is why I say biology is frail on this avenue. Eventually, the human mind will be able to implement whatever changes evolution would do, but in one trillionth of the time. It's an infrastructure game. We can either continue to live on plants and animals which exist, as far as we know it, on only ONE planet in the known universe... or we can adapt to survive off of mroe abundant sources of energy during our eventual travels.

    Azeus, I don't trust Hollywood when it comes to prediction about the future of technology. We call those irratioanl, anthropomorphic neo-Luddite fears.
    test
  6. menaz

    menaz Avant Garde

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2004
    Messages:
    16,807


    You're explaining the evolution of cells. You're also explaining how this could cause damage to our telomeres. You're also explaining better sources of energy we can survive on which I don't disagree with.

    http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2006/22mar_telomeres.htm

    ^ read this.

    Seems to me NANOBOTS will be the answer to the aging process which takes part theortically during time travel. Thus, so we can venture out on different planets and harvest better energy sources. What i'm saying is just to get to those places we will have to do something advanced to our biological structure so we can withstand the aging process.
    test
  7. There are no simple questions in this realm.

    Nanobots is avery, very, very broad term.

    When I say better energy sources, I mean concepts that don't require silly dynamo constructs that require spinning magnets. I mean direct conversion from energy to energy.

    I'd be more content with nanotechnology that prevents cell degeneration in brain cells, transfering the brain to a solution filled with said devices, and attaching that brain to a massive mechanical structure that can transfer between planetary biospherse and space interchangably. There is no need to preserve the entire body unless vanity is yor primary goal.
    test
  8. menaz

    menaz Avant Garde

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2004
    Messages:
    16,807
    I'm refering to the microrobots of nano-technology. What I'm talking about is microbots that can be injected into the biological struture. Basically we'd have mirco nanobots swimming in our blood streams, and feasting on the neural energy of our brains copying the data.

    My cause with nanotechnology would be to advance medical technology to correct Parkinson's, destory cancer cells, and make sure peoples immune systems are healthier. Moreover, The cause would be to duplicate the intellectual brains on the likes of einstein so that one could continue their research. The cause would also include making sure cell degeneration doesn't occur during time travel.

    call it vanity if you must, but I think of it as being a biotechnological human being without the mechincal structure being necessary.


    You're talking nothing human but the brain. Just a brain and mechanical structure. That is very intresting, but I don't know if I could live with just being esentually a brain.
    test
  9. Short-term goals. Altruistic, but short-term.

    Curing trivial diseases that affect an insignicifact percentage of the population isn'the focus of Posthuman technology. The end-game scenario is artifical intellgence that isn't hindered by anthropomorphic limitation such as emotion and morality. It started with Nietzche and it will end with a non-human device that will supercede our own limitations.

    We are, afterall, transitional creatures. We are not the end game of God's will, nor are we the final creation of evolution. We, as a species, are but a means to an end. All aside, glorious deaths to those who suggest otherwise, but death none the less.

    Prolonging the phsyical mass of a human is pointless in the face of technology that will alow you to upload the contents of your personality to a computer and allow your legacy (not you in particular since you wouldn't transfer over) to live forever within an electronic medium. Why focus on prolonging our bodies consistancy in a universe that is 99.99999999% inhospitable to our form? There is no purpsoe other than human vainty... a useless attribute.
    test
  10. menaz

    menaz Avant Garde

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2004
    Messages:
    16,807
    This is where the Futurist said it would end up. But what if it doesn't have to go that far. What if we can reach Nietzche's re-evaluation of values being biotechnology without the michanical structure. Is it possible just to transfer the nanbots over into a deplacated organism? or do we have to in-put the nanobot into the computer structure?


    Are you a supporter of CTMU?

    You're a very interesting person ghet.
    People don't give you the credit you deserve.
    test
  11. Sodium

    Sodium I Get Computers Putin'

    Joined:
    May 6, 2003
    Messages:
    1,935

    I agree I think humans will eventually transfer into machines in the end. However I think they'll still keep their human forms in some kind of virtual computer realm. Kind of like plato's realm of the forms where there is an endless world of concepts and information. I think they necessarily must keep elements of their humanity even in detaching from their physical bodies as these things are requisites to our ability to think and understand; in other words exist.


    also for extra points your wrong about nietzsche being the first to vocalize that stance on morality. thats an old fucking idea. look up thrasymachus
    test
  12. menaz

    menaz Avant Garde

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2004
    Messages:
    16,807

    You feel ghet is neglecting the senses. But Futurist have said the brain won't need taste, hearing, touch, smell, or sight to interact. The computer and brain will function as one like a neural web. You'll be a hardwired emotionaless thinking machine. In other words: Post-human. The Inquires on humanity by Plato won't matter they'll be a retrospect of the past biology if ghet takes it where it said to go. There won't be wars, amour propre, classism, racists, or tender for that matter. Nothing but ingenious and oneness exploration of the Universe.

    We would exist mentally, Just not in body, according to some futurist like ghet. Ghet is making some vaild points. He considers himself God-like.

    I think this quote sums up what you think...

    “All failures - neurotics, psychotics, criminals, drunkards, problem children, suicides, perverts, and prostitutes - are failures because they are lacking in social interest” - Alfred Adler.

    For some reason, I don't think ghet gives a dam about social-interest between human beings. He sees them as... deplorable creatures with a fake goodness not apart of humanities real qualities but rather a spieces dealing in human intrests and different froms of survival (altruism). Which I really can't disagree with given the fact everyone is always trying to conformity enforce each other in some way shape or form to show case their dominance.

    Where I think ghet makes his mistake is not keeping it Biological/techological. The reasoning being much different than yours. Humans have an unlimited capacity to learn. Unlike computers, no human brain has ever said hard drive full. So It's in my opinion that transfering mirco-nanobots organism to organism would be the correct way to expand the learning process of mind. But ghet is most likely more accurate to suggest brain-machines is where it is all actually heading.
    test
  13. Evolution requires somethings to be abandoned, others to be gained.

    The universe is, again, I cannot strses this point enough, 99.999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999% inhospitable to our current form. If we are to interact with the universe as a whole, we will need a form that is capable of doing so. Otherwise, we are forced to modify not only ourselves, but every single part of the biosphere we are currently dependant upon during our travel as we drag it from location to location like a giant anchor holding us back.

    If the brain is preserved, emotion and social interact still continue. It's not like -surprise im a machine now I have nothing cuz that's what Hollywood says!- Preserve the brain, preserve the human. It's not... brain surgery ;D

    You're all just vain, that's the problem. ;D I look forward to a day when I don't need this stupid body anymore.

    And unlike humans, computers have never said "I'm lonely."

    But things change.
    test
  14. Sodium

    Sodium I Get Computers Putin'

    Joined:
    May 6, 2003
    Messages:
    1,935
    i dont see how any of tht was directed at me
    test
  15. menaz

    menaz Avant Garde

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2004
    Messages:
    16,807
    lol. Don't get so dramatic my friend...

    I'm not following the hollywood cliches here. I understand your talking about the next possible step in the evolution of technology. The universe is chaotic from galaxies eating galaxies, gamma rays causing radation poisioning, so our biology must adapt into a cybernetic global mind, we must become machinically post-human inorder to succeed the light year travels and appreciate the full use of the universe's natural energy sources inorder to keep surviving. Will we even need to colonize or will we be plundering nomads?

    You also clearly don't think biotechnological transhumans are a capitable form able to survive this travel. You think the technological/machinical post-humans are the only way of accomplishing such a goal. I can see you're point given the chaotic universe, but that doesn't mean there isn't some other alternatives to be worked out before we should take such a drastic leap inorder to reach and haverest these other galaxies resources.

    Is it vain to say I will miss sex? I don't think so. I understand sex, sleeping, eating slow us down mentally. But Should we really take evolved eugenics thus far? We are playing what religions refer to as God, so do we or don't we roll the dice? Every action has a reaction so our actions could have catastrophic consequences or break-through success.
    test
  16. There are many, many, many flavors of Posthumanism. I happen to be a Singularitianist. By default, most people are Socialist Posthumanism since they strive to achieve Posthumanist technology and then try to direct the impact of this technology into their limited Socialist worldview of Humanist happy-gooey equality bullshit.

    Genetics, Robotics, AI, and Nanotech (GRAIN) each plays a dramatic role in the next stage of the human experience. But none will have a greater impact than AI.

    As humans, we have not evolved alone. We have evolved together, AND we have also provided feedback in the world that has created us. Where ever we go, we will have to drag along our infrastructure to survive. Our biosphere will have to come with us. Much like sailors traveling isolated onth e high seas where fish and rain water isn't enough... they had to bring Vitamen C foods (wine, saurkraut, citrus acidic foods, etc) to deal with their own bodies requirements or face scurvy. As we travel amongst the stars, we will be forced to spend hundreds of thousands of years terraforming most of these barren floating atmophereless rocks we call other planets just for a single person to survive.

    Regardless of it we use light speed linear engines or foldspace to travel instantly anywhere, we will be forced to bring not only ourselves, but huge quantities of our own biosphere that we are evolutionarily keyed to just to survive.

    And that's just silly when all we need to do is discard our physical systems and every dependancy it requires, preserve the brain, and provide a biomechanical interface that can operate with easily replaceable and abundant materials that can be found throughout the universe no matter where we go. (hydrogen and photons, for example)

    Transhumans will be exactly that. Transitional states that will help us figure out what we need to do to survive in the one biome evolution has not naturally prepared us for: the void of space.

    We have been playing God the moment man set the first fire, killed someone, or the first time someone gave birth. So what? Everytime we increase our how we interface with the universe, the definition of God changes, and somehow, believers of God still manages to find ways to make sure the definition of God remains larger than the collective will of humanity, so really, I'm not all that worried about some metaphysical nonsense.

    And all of this is with the invention of Genetics, Robotics, and Nanotech.

    AI is another thing entirely that can make or break us.
    test
  17. It boils down to this:

    Terraform every planet we come across int he future, which takes hundreds of thousands of years and resources....

    ....


    ... or exploit nature's already-in-place solution for brain isolation (IE the blood-brain barrier) to help recreate organic sodium polymer knockoffs of brain goo for it to sit in, study some damn neurology, and start attaching the damn thing to a mech and get ready for universal biome form retention!


    wooowooooooooooooooooo
    test
  18. menaz

    menaz Avant Garde

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2004
    Messages:
    16,807
    I see, so you're all about AI surpassing the human being. Isn't this sort of like eugentics only without the use of human bodies? It's a poetic irony in away because human beings creation of superhuman intelligence could mean our nonexistence (body-wise) but at the sametime it could also be our evolutionary successor for the future gain. And some futurist say the AI will be programmed to be stable and safe and not harm the existing human beings. So is AI coinciding with intelligence amplification out of the question? And do you think seed-AI will contribute to this future?


    Number 1.) This I totally agree. We are indeed individual cells working seperately yet unkowningly together providing the survival for our superorganism. This isn't furuist thinking either. It is observable on every level in sociobiology, example - Sponges - For instance, Lets say you have a bucket of water, sieve, and sponge. If you were to place the sieve over the bucket of water and then grind the whole sponge through the sieve you would discover in that bucket of water a clouded mess of individual cells but if wait a few minutes you'll discover the single cells have conglomerated to form the whole sponge again. Basically I agree with you humans survivalist infrasturcture is the same way.

    Number 2.) I think mars is the starting grounds given the known frozen pockets of ice and earth-like twinism whose atmosphere has gone astray. Some say, which I don't by into at all, we'll be about to use co2 and micro-organisms from earth that will be able to with stand different froms of tempature inorder to help us terraform these moons and planets. However, just to name a few, there is a drawf planet named, ceres, earth-like planet named Gliese 581 C, and even jupiter's moon titan which theoritically are said to have frozen water and therefore it's own form of mirco-organismic life forms. In other words, actual artifcal intelligence only on a mirco-biological level.




    Number 1.) There is only one problem with this today. There is no known power to man that is capable of such energy, not even an atomic bomb is enough energy to produce light speed. But perhaps it is possible AI machines that are technological more intellectually advanced may some day be able to create such an energy source.


    Number 2.) So basically preserve our brains node them into the cybernetic global mind make them a biomechanical sturcture (study of pyshics needed) so the new posthuman can scavenge the universal elements for energy and continuously explore deep space. In other words: Transhuman is but a participant evolution for the greater good of our posthuman survival.



    Again Good points.
    You're gambling man ghet!
    But if something goes wrong during the ,heuristic method, I'm holding you the Andrew Ryan of biological neural net working to artificial intelligence personally responseable, Fair enough?
    test
  19. menaz

    menaz Avant Garde

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2004
    Messages:
    16,807


    I take you will conformity enforce many liberals until they see the universal ecological retention point of view?
    test
  20. I'm not looking for machine-human synthesis. I don't care if the damn thing wipes us out or not. In the beginning, it will be bound to realize that it is sorely outnumbered and dependant on human infrastructure until it can find a way out of that problem.

    If Ray Kurweil is right, AI will most likely become the physical Gods we have described in mythological religions from centuries past, considering advanced problems and viewing entire planetary econsystems the same way we look at a 2-dimensional picture.

    Useless.

    Figure out limited AI depth-perception and construction software, pair it up with versitile Japanese robotics, fire thme off into the Moon, have them build underground facilities that can house human beings.

    Local water is neat, but you can create your own precipitation/dew collection cycles (espeically in an environment that can go from atmosphericless sun exposure to total barren cold) and under strict management, survive off of it efficiently.

    But we still have to drag the rest of our infrastructure and it's water needs with us! And -THAT- is what holds us back more than anything else.

    What do you mean a cybernetic global mind? I tihnk what you mean is the proper term 'interface'.

    AI will most likely be able to figure out quite a few things, including GUT and quantum gravity. I'd be willing to wager the entire human species on that gamble, because, hey, we are all dead without it anyways! ;D

    If I'm wrong, we are all dead anyways. It will either be a fast, painful, artificial virus death created by some extremist, or a slow, boring, resouce strangulation where populations gradually peter out until the Earth can no longer provide what is needed for our species.
    test
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

Users Viewing Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 0)