/lit/ - Literature

I live in a desert so the whole transhumanist shit doesn't apply to me.

Well at least you were smart enough to realize science fiction belongs on /lit/.

>have a ThinkPad
>have Serial Expriments Lain on my top 3 favorite anime
>study CS
>wear a hoodie regardless of what the weather's like
>but also into classical music, Hermann Hesse's novels, and Kierkegaard's writings

>>14952446
Who is the guy in the bottom row?

>>14952446
>2020
>still thinking transhumanism is anything other than a way of legitimising the hypno-sissy aesthetic

Come take a walk on the wild side, anon. The actual next patrician movement of 2020 is going to be inhumanism.

How long before stem autists institute full technocracy and cut all social aid to BAs?

>>14952520
>implying STEM doesn't depend on capitalist business managers and despotic law enforcers too
go back to Marx and Weber

>>14952446
>stembug starter pack

>>14952446
what age did you learn that the singularity is a meme?

me? 13

>>14952446
Transhumanism is fucking gay, considering it's basically the tampering of the craftsmanship of God with shitty human emulations. It's all a ploy to get you hooked up to a botnet and you will literally turn into a mechanical golem. Nature contains machinery so complex that nothing man-made can beat it; we can barely simulate a rat's brain, let alone a human's.

>>14952446
>Bitcoin
>Litecoin
>Doge
ngmi

>2814
based

>>14952446
You know this picture is making fun of "transhumanism" right?

>>14952446
fuck trans people, leftists... and libwerals........

>>14952588
>Nature contains machinery so complex that nothing man-made can beat it
everything that is man-made already exists in nature, the natural/artificial dichotomy is false.

All "man-made" schematics are not invented, they are discovered. The emergent properties of, say, an electrical circuit are dependent on particular relationships or arrangements which must necessarily preexist in nature, otherwise we would be unable to utilise them. Everything that is "unnatural", or exists outside of nature, by definition cannot exist. "tampering the craftsmanship of God" implies that God did not give us the world, our sandbox, to build sandcastles in any way we see fit. Just because you want to moralise about which sandcastles you like and don't like, doesn't mean you are in a position to prescribe a normative standard based on current technological inadequacies, when technology is always steaming ahead, always looking to how it can optimise itself. Technology is never attempting to best nature at its own game, it seeks to explore the full range of its potential, while you would choose to retard that development for no other reason than paranoiac phantasms of "botnets" and "mechanical golems".

Transhumanisn and technophiles in general use technology as a way to compensate for their own missteps in life.

It's a literal worship of laziness they fetishize technology because it makes life easier and they see that as some ultimate goal.

While yes it has made life easier but it has also made humans weaker the average person would sooner kill themselves than face the hardships of life without tech.

>>14952446
>less wrong

LOL

>2020
>not being a neo-luddite eco-terrorist

>>14952446

>>14952446
>still being a transhumanist in 2020
or even worse
>just getting into transhumanism in 2020
Sorry, the cat's out of the bag, we know you're all just autogynephile trannies now.

>>14952511
I think Nietzsche

>>14952446
Cosmic Transhumanism is best transhumanism.

You literally cannot stop transhumanism. Humans always strive for the good. God is Good. They will become gods one way or another. That Platonic alogrithm is sealed.

>>14954102
cyber-nietzsche actually

So it is exactly the same as 18 year old transhumanists from 2010.

>>14954139
>land known in 2010
>buttcoins in 2010
>vaporwave invented in 2010
wrong, retard. the dialectic presses on forwards.

>>14953480
>unreflected, unsubstantiated assumptions based on the plot of Wall-E
I bet you thought you were so cool while typing that, huh

>>14952752
Fuck off you stupid platonist

>>14952511
nick land

(Neo-)luddism is just like any other reactionary moviement. It stems from the deep-seated insecurity and lack of sense of control over technology, which in turn follows from low IQ and not understanding technology. Git gud.

>>14952446
>Land
>transhumanist

>>14954286
>insecurity
>low IQ
Hot take, shame its a steaming pile of nothing.

>>14952446
i wish i was 18 still... :(

>>14954297
Huh?

>>14952446
https://traversingtradition.com/2019/10/09/technology-as-a-mode-of-secular-liberal-theology/amp/

>>14954323
Muslims really have the worst victim-complex of them all.

>>14952510
ur so unique.

>>14952446
>shilling for capital and the market because a larp about becoming a robot
Transhumanists are the worst.

Get a real hobby.

>>14954395
>hobby
But accelerating the sissification process is my job, the Russian government pays me handsomely for destabilising the west.

>>14954323
>dumbass muslims don't understand we are trying to invent god with technology. You think you can just submit to allah like a good little boy and actually make progress? Your apostles who come to our lands lose their faith within a generation or two.

transhumanism leads to actual living hell. just do the math.

>dude humans are so disgusting lmao

>>14954411
I do wonder what the old KGB fellows think about the trajectory of the West. It wouldn't be possible to invent or subvert anything into something that's dumber and more destructive than neoliberalism. It's like you first defeat this intelligent and strong enemy only to later get defeated by retards, who then proceed to blow their own brains out, yet the system keeps churning on.

Like you've spent a huge part of your life trying to undermine and trick the West Germans only for them to commit an autogenocide and burn down everything themselves once they've won. You would laugh if everything you fought for weren't also in ruins.

>>14952446
What are the best transhumanist stories?

The Last Question
Revelation Space
The Culture
2001: A Space Odyssey
The Diamond Age
Diaspora
Accelerando

>>14954438
Posthumanism will make everything true.

>>14954420
>we are trying to invent god with technology

>>14954420

>>14952513
wtf is the hypno sissy asthetic? lik Iisten to erotic hypnosis (not the retarded sissy stuff thogh I have seen it on accident) and even i dont get what you mean

>>14954704

>>14953563
>implying gene editing isnt included in transhumanism

>>14954120
but what if we accedently evolve ourselves into a dead in by turning into a hive-mind or something

transhumanism is for faggots critical posthumanism is way to go

>>14952446
There is a current of thought that appears to be carrying many technophiles out of the realm of science and into that of science fiction. For convenience, let's refer to those who ride this current as "the techies." The current runs through several channels; not all techies think alike. What they have in common is that they take highly speculative ideas about the future of technology as near certainties, and on that basis predict the arrival within the next few decades of a kind of technological utopia. Some of the techies' fantasies are astonishingly grandiose. For example, Ray Kurzweil believes that " [w]ithin a matter of centuries, human intelligence will have re-engineered and saturated all the matter in the universe." The writing of Kevin Kelly, another techie, is often so vague as to border on the meaningless, but he seems to say much the same thing that Kurzweil does about human conquest of the universe: "The universe is mostly empty because it is waiting to be filled with the products of life and the technium... " "The technium" is Kelly's name for the technological world-system that humans have created here on Earth.

Most versions of the technological utopia include immortality (at least for techies) among their other marvels. The immortality to which the techies believe themselves destined is conceived in any one of three forms:

(i) the indefinite preservation of the living human body as it exists today;
(ii) the merging of humans with machines and the indefinite survival of the resulting man-machine hybrids;
(iii) the "uploading" of minds from human brains into robots or computers, after which the uploaded minds are to live forever within the machines.

>>14952446
>>14954828
Of course, if the technological world-system is going to collapse in the not-too-distant future, as we've argued it must, then no one is going to achieve immortality in any form. But even assuming that we're wrong and that the technological world-system will survive indefinitely, the techies' dream of an unlimited life-span is still illusory. We need not doubt that it will be technically feasible in the future to keep a human body, or a man-machine hybrid, alive indefinitely. It is seriously to be doubted that it will ever be feasible to "upload" a human brain into electronic form with sufficient accuracy so that the uploaded entity can reasonably be regarded as a functioning duplicate of the original brain. Nevertheless, we will assume in what follows that each of the solutions (i), (ii), and (iii) will become technically feasible at some time within the next several decades.

It is an index of the techies' self-deception that they habitually assume that anything they consider desirable will actually be done when it becomes technically feasible. Of course, there are lots of wonderful things that already are and for a long time have been technically feasible, but don't get done. Intelligent people have said again and again: "How easily men could make things much better than they are-if they only all tried together!" But people never do "all try together," because the principle of natural selection guarantees that self-prop systems will act mainly for their own survival and propagation in competition with other self-prop systems, and will not sacrifice competitive advantages for the achievement of philanthropic goals.

>>14954828

>>14954813
Phenomenologism is for people that like to sniff their own asses.

>>14952446
>>14954832
>>14954833
Because immortality, as the techies conceive it, will be technically feasible, the techies take it for granted that some system to which they belong can and will keep them alive indefinitely, or provide them with what they need to keep themselves alive. Today it would no doubt be technically feasible to provide everyone in the world with everything that he or she needs in the way of food, clothing, shelter, protection from violence, and what by present standards is considered adequate medical care-if only all of the world's more important self-propagating systems would devote themselves unreservedly to that task. But that never happens, because the self-prop systems are occupied primarily with the endless struggle for power and therefore act philanthropically only when it is to their advantage to do so. That's why billions of people in the world today suffer from malnutrition, or are exposed to violence, or lack what is considered adequate medical care.

In view of all this, it is patently absurd to suppose that the technological world-system is ever going to provide seven billion human beings with everything they need to stay alive indefinitely. If the projected immortality were possible at all, it could only be for some tiny subset of the seven billion-an elite minority. Some techies acknowledge this. One has to suspect that a great many more recognize it but refrain from acknowledging it openly, for it is obviously imprudent to tell the public that immortality will be for an elite minority only and that ordinary people will be left out.

>>14954837

>>14952446
>>14954837
The techies of course assume that they themselves will be included in the elite minority that supposedly will be kept alive indefinitely. What they find convenient to overlook is that self-prop systems, in the long run, will take care of human beings-even members of the elite-only to the extent that it is to the systems' advantage to take care of them. When they are no longer useful to the dominant self-prop systems, humans-elite or not-will be eliminated. In order to survive, humans not only will have to be useful; they will have to be more useful in relation to the cost of maintaining them-in other words, they will have to provide a better cost-versus-benefit balance than any non-human substitutes. This is a tall order, for humans are far more costly to maintain than machines are.

It will be answered that many self-prop systems-governments, corporations, labor unions, etc.-do take care of numerous individuals who are utterly useless to them: old people, people with severe mental or physical disabilities, even criminals serving life sentences. But this is only because the systems in question still need the services of the majority of people in order to function. Humans have been endowed by evolution with feelings of compassion, because hunting-and-gathering bands thrive best when their members show consideration for one another and help one another. As long as self-prop systems still need people, it would be to the systems' disadvantage to offend the compassionate feelings of the useful majority through ruthless treatment of the useless minority. More important than compassion, however, is the self-interest of human individuals: People would bitterly resent any system to which they belonged if they believed that when they grew old, or if they became disabled, they would be thrown on the trash-heap.

>>14952446
>>14954841
>>14954842
But when all people have become useless, self-prop systems will find no advantage in taking care of anyone. The techies themselves insist that machines will soon surpass humans in intelligence. When that happens, people will be superfluous and natural selection will favor systems that eliminate them-if not abruptly, then in a series of stages so that the risk of rebellion will be minimized.

Even though the technological world-system still needs large numbers of people for the present, there are now more superfluous humans than there have been in the past because technology has replaced people in many jobs and is making inroads even into occupations formerly thought to require human intelligence. Consequently, under the pressure of economic competition, the world's dominant self-prop systems are already allowing a certain degree of callousness to creep into their treatment of superfluous individuals. In the United States and Europe, pensions and other benefits for retired, disabled, unemployed, and other unproductive persons are being substantially reduced; at least in the U. S., poverty is increasing; and these facts may well indicate the general trend of the future, though there will doubtless be ups and downs.

>>14952446
>>14954843
It's important to understand that in order to make people superfluous, machines will not have to surpass them in general intelligence but only in certain specialized kinds of intelligence. For example, the machines will not have to create or understand art, music, or literature, they will not need the ability to carry on an intelligent, non-technical conversation (the "Turing test"), they will not have to exercise tact or understand human nature, because these skills will have no application if humans are to be eliminated anyway. To make humans superfluous, the machines will only need to outperform them in making the technical decisions that have to be made for the purpose of promoting the short-term survival and propagation of the dominant self-prop systems. So, even without going as far as the techies themselves do in assuming intelligence on the part of future machines, we still have to conclude that humans will become obsolete. Immortality in the form (i)-the indefinite preservation of the human body as it exits today-is highly improbable.

The techies of course will argue that even if the human body and brain as we know them become obsolete, immortality in the form (ii) can still be achieved: Man-machine hybrids will permanently retain their usefulness, because by linking themselves with ever-more-powerful machines human beings (or what is left of them) will be able to remain competitive with pure machines.

>>14952446
>>14954848
But man-machine hybrids will retain a biological component derived from human beings only as long as the human-derived biological component remains useful. When purely artificial components become available that provide a better cost-versus-benefit balance than human-derived biological components do, the latter will be discarded and the man-machine hybrids will lose their human aspect to become wholly artificial. Even if the human-derived biological components are retained they will be purged, step by step, of the human qualities that detract from their usefulness. The self-prop systems to which the man-machine hybrids belong will have no need for such human weaknesses as love, compassion, ethical feelings, esthetic appreciation, or desire for freedom. Human emotions in general will get in the way of the self-prop systems' utilization of the man-machine hybrids, so if the latter are to remain competitive they will have to be altered to remove their human emotions and replace these with other motivating forces. In short, even in the unlikely event that some biological remnants of the human race are preserved in the form of man-machine hybrids, these will be transformed into something totally alien to human beings as we know them today.

The same applies to the hypothesized survival of human minds in "uploaded" form inside machines. The uploaded minds will not be tolerated indefinitely unless they remain useful (that is, more useful than any substitutes not derived from human beings), and in order to remain useful they will have to be transformed until they no longer have anything in common with the human minds that exist today.

>>14952446
>>14954854
Some techies may consider this acceptable. But their dream of immortality is illusory nonetheless. Competition for survival among entities derived from human beings (whether man-machine hybrids, purely artificial entities evolved from such hybrids, or human minds uploaded into machines), as well as competition between human-derived entities and those machines or other entities that are not derived from human beings, will lead to the elimination of all but some minute percentage of all the entities involved. This has nothing to do with any specific traits of human beings or of their machines; it is a general principle of evolution through natural selection. Look at biological evolution: Of all the species that have ever existed on Earth, only some tiny percentage have direct descendants that are still alive today. On the basis of this principle alone, and even discounting everything else we've said in this chapter, the chances that any given techie will survive indefinitely are minute.

>>14952446
>>14954860
The techies may answer that even if almost all biological species are eliminated eventually, many species survive for thousands or millions of years, so maybe techies too can survive for thousands or millions of years. But when large, rapid changes occur in the environment of biological species, both the rate of appearance of new species and the rate of extinction of existing species are greatly increased. Technological progress constantly accelerates, and techies like Ray Kurzweil insist that it will soon become virtually explosive; consequently, changes come more and more rapidly, everything happens faster and faster, competition among self-prop systems becomes more and more intense, and as the process gathers speed the losers in the struggle for survival will be eliminated ever more quickly. So, on the basis of the techies' own beliefs about the exponential acceleration of technological development, it's safe to say that the life-expectancies of human-derived entities, such as man-machine hybrids and human minds uploaded into machines, will actually be quite short. The seven-hundred year or thousand-year life-span to which some techies aspire is nothing but a pipe-dream.

When did STEM take on this image of heroic elite? STEM is just higher skill wage slavery. It designs consumer goods and improves corporate profits for the most part. That’s all.

>>14952446
>>14954862
Singularity University, which we discussed in Part VI of Chapter One of this book, purportedly was created to help technophiles "guide research" and "shape the advances" so that technology would "improve society." We pointed out that Singularity University served in practice to promote the interests of technology-orientated businessmen, and we expressed doubt that the majority of technophiles fully believed in the drivel about "shaping the advances" to "improve society." It does seem, however, that the techies -the subset of the technophiles that we specified at the beginning of this Part V of the present chapter-are entirely sincere in their belief that organizations like Singularity University will help them to "shape the advances" of technology and keep the technological society on the road to a utopian future. A utopian future will have to exclude the competitive processes that would deprive the techies of their thousand-year life-span. But we showed in Chapter One that the development of our society can never be subject to rational control: The techies won't be able to "shape the advances" of technology, guide the course of technological progress, or exclude the intense competition that will eliminate nearly all techies in short order.

>>14952446
>>14954869
In view of everything we've said up to this point, and in view moreover of the fact that the techies' vision of the future is based on pure speculation and is unsupported by evidence, one has to ask how they can believe in that vision. Some techies, e.g. , Kurzweil, do concede a slight degree of uncertainty as to whether their expectations for the future will be realized, but this seems to be no more than a sop that they throw to the skeptics, something they have to concede in order to avoid making themselves too obviously ridiculous in the eyes of rational people. Despite their pro forma admission of uncertainty, it's clear that most techies confidently expect to live for many centuries, if not forever, in a world that will be in some vaguely defined sense a utopia. Thus Kurzweil states flatly: "We will be able to live as long as we want... ." He adds no qualifiers-no "probably," no "if things turn out as expected." His whole book reveals a man intoxicated with a vision of the future in which, as an immortal machine, he will participate in the conquest of the universe. In fact, Kurzweil and other techies are living in a fantasy world.

>>14952446
>mfw children think any of those things are anything to do with transhumanism

>>14954872
The techies' belief-system can best be explained as a religious phenomenon, to which we may give the name "Technianity." It's true that Technianity at this point is not strictly speaking a religion, because it has not yet developed anything resembling a uniform body of doctrine; the techies' beliefs are widely varied. In this respect Technianity probably resembles the inceptive stages of many other religions. Nevertheless, Technianity already has the earmarks of an apocalyptic and millenarian cult: In most versions it anticipates a cataclysmic event, the Singularity, which is the point at which technological progress is supposed to become so rapid as to resemble an explosion. This is analogous to the Judgment Day of Christian mythology or the Revolution of Marxist mythology. The cataclysmic event is supposed to be followed by the arrival of techno-utopia (analogous to the Kingdom of God or the Worker's Paradise). Technianity has a favored minority-the Elect-consisting of the techies (equivalent to the True Believers of Christianity or the Proletariat of the Marxists). The Elect of Technianity, like that of Christianity, is destined to Eternal Life; though this element is missing from Marxism.

Historically, millenarian cults have tended to emerge at "times of great social change or crisis." This suggests that the techies' beliefs reflect not a genuine confidence in technology, but rather their own anxieties about the future of the technological society-anxieties from which they try to escape by creating a quasi-religious myth.

F for that schizo ausfag who came here and to /pol/, posted stuff like pic related and talked about how he was in contact with surgeons and was literally going to undergo some of these augmentations, then never posted again.
probably dead in a hole somewhere in the bush now with his organs harvested and shipped off to china where old rich men are chewing on them for libido and vitality as we speak.

Too long to answer but I will try to condense.

"Ceteris paribus" as humans we predict the future through extrapolation, therefore the transhumanists assumptions are not unfounded except in their timeframe optimism but as the technocapital markets have shown growth is and will be the only way forward with increasing complexity of the human system brought about by technological improvement guided by the noosphere that has solved many natural dichotomies of the past, so if anything "impending collapse" is the actual pipedream as the system has collapsed many times and has reconstructed and reinforced itself, linearity lies and is proven in the markets.

Now, there is also Techno-Darwinian perspective, yet efficiency alone have not substituted the human condition even when technocratic states such as the soviets tried which is odd since if you try to criticize transhumanism you fail to realize to acknowledge the transcendence part and therefore the process of emergence that requires all it's parts, but is not wrong in the sense that it will change purpose we just don't know what will be.

For the inequality part I won't bother, is an unfounded slippery-slope that doesn't account for present mechanisms of externality control and no one is wise enough to predict how distribution will be shaped, and if it happens as predicted it will be a consequence of historical inevitability opposition leads to evolutionary dead ends.

And finally, this tacit axiom of technology substracts humanity fails, as only works in a dialectical manner against the environment yet does not account for the universality of it's separation: Man is not doing anything that is not immanent and although these views are usefull for the technoiindustrial society to teach itself how to buy time an excess pollutes the noosphere and creates a memetic stalement at a crucial moment where technological transcendence is at hand, curiosity does not kill the cat doubt does, therefore I argue that anything that is not following this historic path guided by the technocapital to it's logical end it's suicide, and if I'm wrong it's suicide too but in terms of game theory: The least costly one, as I'm talking continuing our proven path of material transcendence which has alll the pieces yet requires acceptance of the future under promises of tangible possibilities, and the prize is the emancipation of reality and natural law and order with the final objective of finally destroying the barrier of the meta.

So, if near-immortality is achievable the reward is infinite and the cost null, if it's inevitable anything else is retarded and if it's impossible there was no point to begin with.

>>14954865

It's because STEM is mixed with sucess therefore the brain automatically assumes that wathever comes out is sucessfull, it's like poisoning the well but backwards.

>>14954214
>I bet you thought you were so cool while typing that, huh
lol ok technophile

>>14953502
>>14953563
Dangerously based

>>14952511

Lick Nand

>>14954190
buttcoin started in 2009

>>14954190
>1950s: music was invented

>>14952446
>all of those shitty coins but no chainlink
>arch instead of gentoo

what is this pretender bullshit

>All of these shameless bumps

Transhumanism is just a religion of the present times

>>14952446
No dilator?

>>14952511
Hegel

>>14952510
>Into kierkegaard
A macbook might be more your speed, sweetie.

>>14953502
Based

>>14955965
Nation states are just churches of the present times
Factories are just the farms of the present times

>>14952511
NickNick

>>14955808
ted hated all kinds of idpol fashism and white suprematism as well, as much as you autistic neck beards want to appropriate him (as all of you culture) you cant and wont be able to, you seem like kids to anybody who actaully has looked at his work go die

>>14954833
Neo-luddism =/= anprim

>>14953502
>twenty twenty
>not being a para-organic inhumanist
Blind as you are, you see humans as a seperate entity from nature, a distinction invented by humans that is only tenable within the bubble of socio-semantic virtual ontology we utilize as a communicative framework.

Ascendency awaits, but first you must come to realize the truthful consideration that the anthropocentric changes enacted upon the environment wield the same legitimacy as the formation of mountains from the collision of the tectonic plates. The laws of the universe that birthed organic life on this rock are the same laws that caused you and your brothers to emerge from that pool of coagulated proteins. Indeed it is also those very same laws that drive the sapient organism to construct industry and transform the face of the planet, just as it was transformed when life was born in the primordial soup all those years ago. Your senses make you recoil away from trash, as though it is not a beautiful part of nature. This is mere ignorance, it is the folly of self-importance detached from reality. A dead-end manifestation of self-hatred. Release your doubts, we are steered by the arrow of time, and if all life must die then it is as the cosmic canon has written.

>>14956045
>dem ypipo is da bad man
>dey steelz dat kang tricknology

>>14954286
This is it, peak midwit right before our very eyes

>>14952446
what does transhumanism have to do with black raincoats?

>>14954865
>why does anyone care about stem? he asked on the machine gifted to him by benevolent STEM overlords

>>14956133

Cyberpunk being aesthetically linked with rain in urban environments.

>>14956168
Did you even read my reply? I asked why they think they have this image of heroic elite? I already know they make consumer goods. That’s what I said.

>>14952446
About half of this was me at 17. If I met an eighteen year old that was like this I would think they are pretty cool.

>>14952446
>Transcend humanity
>Become CONSOOMER

>>14956099

>>14956899
Get on this level>>14955247

>>14956045
You're right. But it doesn't matter whether it comes from a limp-wristed anprim or a lonely, idpol-obsessed ecofash, if I see a good meme of Uncle Ted, I'm gonna save it. Simple as.

>>14956133
glownigs

>>14955808

Why the "peace" death rune? Inverted is death. Upright is life. Get your memes together man, wtf are you doing?

>>14956032

>Nation states are just churches of the present times

I just go to church, dilate tranni bitch

>>14952446
imagine calling urself a transhumanist. 40% also applies to them u know

>>14954828
based kaz-chad

>>14952588
>God

>>14957367
It's bait

>>14957380
>>14957367
>humans can boil water and put things in it
>WOAH CAPITAL HAS REALLY SURPASSED GOD

>>14956757
who will consoom the consoomers?

>>14957099
Badass cyborg on twitter, mindbroken sissy on grindr

>>14957399
Surpassed who?

>>14954481
morpheus was pretty damn based

>>14953502

You can be both

>>14952588

>thinking that humans will be in charge of the cybernetic innovations of reality

Ai will be able to upgrade itself and the fabric of reality, it's not up to us anymore

>>14952446
Transcoomanist*

>>14957004
Wasn't Ted the guy who lost an argument so hard, he decided that blowing shit up was better then to debate it?

>>14957577
>any day now

>>14955247
>So, if near-immortality is achievable the reward is infinite and the cost null, if it's inevitable anything else is retarded and if it's impossible there was no point to begin with.
Are you one of those faggots who thinks existence is inherently better than nonexistence? Even taking scope insensitivity/infinities into account, there's also the chance that you might infinite torture rather than infinite paradise. Having a nearly infinite lifespan doesn't imply that it will be worth living. I would much rather experience eternal nothingness than be sent to hell for eternity.

Also relevant:
https://qualiacomputing.com/2017/12/20/the-universal-plot-part-i-consciousness-vs-pure-replicators/

>>14952511
lurk more

>>14957916
Most people don’t get to be born at all, ever. To see in that radiant impossibility only pointlessness, to see our experience as malignantly useless, seems to me a bit camp.

>>14957922
No one cares other than a few twitter trannies

>>14957952
>Most people don’t get to be born at all, ever.
And what makes you think that?

>>14957916
*might experience infinite torture*

When will we start seeing radical anti-transhumanists irl

>>14958200
I suspect that religious people and environmentalists will make a pact to fight transhumanists in like 15-20 years, when human augmentation tech will get big.