/lit/ - Literature

Go to bed, robojesus troll.

Sorry, what book is this?

You want >>>/sci/

>>3993746
isn't this like philosophy or something? how is this /sci/ related?

>>3993752
how is 'science-fiction' philosophy?

go away.

>>3993755
>Transhumanism (abbreviated as H+ or h+) is an international cultural and intellectual movement with an eventual goal of fundamentally transforming the human condition by developing and making widely available technologies to greatly enhance human intellectual, physical, and psychological capacities

Nothing science fiction about it. Why are you so mad about this?

>>3993752
>isn't this like philosophy or something?
No. The only tentative link you can find is in ontology, with philosophy of the mind problems like "Can a fully replicated model of the human mind ever be regarded as conscious?" or "Is the brain purely mechanistic in nature, so could potentially have a lobe partially replaced with a silicon based part?"

>how is this /sci/ related?
Because it's speculation on the future of biology and computer science - both belong on /sci/.

We have this thread continuously here, and it always consists of one crazed guy screaming about robojesus cultists for 300 posts.

>>3993760

>Why are you so mad about this?

Why are you projecting?

>>3993771
>Because it's speculation on the future of biology and computer science - both belong on /sci/.
How about ethics? Those are discussed here all the time.

>"Can a fully replicated model of the human mind ever be regarded as conscious?"
Is it contested? i'm pretty sure your mum and pops replicated your mind that special night.

>We have this thread continuously here, and it always consists of one crazed guy screaming about robojesus cultists for 300 posts.
If this thread pops up all the time here and goes on for 300 posts it means it's worthy of discussion

>>3993786
>How about ethics?
Obama has set up a multi-million dollar ethics committee, comprised of both philosophers and scientists, to discuss the future moral issues surrounding neuro-tech interaction. Try looking into that.

>Is it contested?
Yes, highly. In fact, the question of a 'computer mind' is one of the most contested issues in contemporary philosophy of mind.

>it's worthy of discussion
It's really not. This was the last: http://fuuka.warosu.org/lit/thread/S3965110

>>3993800
>http://fuuka.warosu.org/lit/thread/S3965110
300+ posts and only one recommending any related titles in that thread. I don't think it's transhumanism's fault, just shitty posters'.

I'm very worried about this development. The thing I fear most is that people will try and rush in to some childish, superhero conception of man that will have disastrous consequences.

I bet anyone more well-read than I could pick out dozens of such tales, but I will bring up the one that comes to my (uneducated) mind: the fable of Icarus. Daedelus manufactured wings for Icarus, which is a perfect parallel to what the transhumanists are aiming at - some kind of enhanced bodily ability. But as we all know, Icarus flew too high and his wings were set ablaze by the sun, causing both his figurative and literal downfall. It's a very instructive story (as stories from ancient times tend to be). What's the point in giving man superhuman bodily abilities without first improving him morally? What's the point in making men as strong as gods when they lack the prudence and forbearance of gods? What's the point of making men as bright and as intelligent as gods when they lack the wisdom of gods?
Morally speaking, the Jews and Christians are right in calling mankind wretched. The doctrine of Original Sin - that mankind is fundamentally, morally corrupt - is true. We are vain, conceited, ambitious, envious and spiteful we are. What's the benefit of giving us superhuman bodies when are souls are still so wretched? The only person that these superhuman abilities are fit for are the truly exceptional people like Christ or Buddha, i.e. people that wouldn't ask for them in the first place.

>>3993980
>Icarus flew too high and his wings were set ablaze by the sun, causing both his figurative and literal downfall.
Doesn't it apply to any and all technology, even if ages old? Nukes are over nearly 70 years old; global warming inducing petrochemicals go even further back.

>Morally speaking, the Jews and Christians are right in calling mankind wretched.
You are judging humanity through lens of judeo-christian ethics anyway, so your statement is self-referencial.

>The only person that these superhuman abilities are fit for are the truly exceptional people like Christ or Buddha
Neither of those two are exceptional, even by their own convoluted standards.

>>3993980
Oh, brave Icarus. The symbol of hedonism and joy. He flew higher and faster than anyone before him and died for his bliss. What a brave noble man was Icarus. He knew it would be fateful, but his mortal need for wonder and discovery lead him to push mankind further than it had ever been before.

>>3994037
I honestly don't think that's how the Greek's saw it. I think the Greeks were probably thinking that he was a dumb twat who didn't know what he was getting in to.
Your interpretation is very romantic, i.e. not Greek.

>Transhumanism
As long as neurologists can find a way to stimulate or depress my central nervous system with electrodes so I can traverse the full spectrum of inebriated states at the push of a button, I really don't care what else they do.

>>3994019
Pretty sure the son of god is a little bit exceptional by his own standards. He is the son of god after all.

>>3994056
>depress my central nervous system with electrodes
>Digital drugs

You degenerates are going to ruin the future for everyone. Some scientist will find a way of curing Parkinsons, and you cunts will turn it into digital morphine, and a whole generation will be fucked up cyberjunkies.

>>3994081
It will take generations for the implants to be widely available to the public (probably ~100 years). But yes, eventually we can just stimulate the region of brain we want to to get high/feel good/orgasm.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orgasmatron

>>3993775
Why are you shit posting?

>>3994081
This is my dream.

Living in a crowded, dirty squat with a group of degenerate cyberjunky dropouts. Stealing electricity from the powerlines, and mainlining straight into my opiate receptors.

I was born in the wrong generation. I should have been born 200 years from now.

it seams anyone who uses a cell phone is a small part participating in the transhumanism movement

>>3996171
introducing the human potato

>>3996249
What a hateful remark.

That's pretty much my life at the moment, except my various form of intoxication aren't digital. I can assure you that I am quite far from 'potato'.

>>3996259
yeah, after all, potatoes are useful

>tfw biding my time on welfare until technorapture

But I know Jesus loves me
maybe just a little bit more

I fall on my knees every Sunday
At Zerelda Lee's hardware store

Well it's got to be a robo Jesus
Make me feel good inside
Got to be a robo Jesus
Keep me satisfied

>>3996171
das it mane

>>3996390
>brainspotting
I want to experience that so fucking much. At least I have conventional drugs, but it's nothing compared to what future generations could have.

>>3993980
But ethics are going to be useless once we transfer our minds to our minds to machines, we will lose all need for culture and look towards doing nothing but advancing science, and I can't wait for this to happen.

People are bored with being human or something. Maybe we're just ugly and sick all the time.

>>3996479
I'm just tired of being held back by emotions and ethics, once we become machines we'll abandon them and use nothing but pure logic.

>>3996479

>>3996484
There's no incentive to give up emotions like love.

>>3996437
>>3996484
You are ignoring the 'resistance' that will oppose you, burn your sever sites, try to sabotage every thing that you do just to preserve humanity.

I'm on your side, but digital utopia will not be easy with half the world against us.

>>3996490
Yeah there is, any emotion is a weakness that clouds judgement.
>>3996493
More than likely they will die out, then we will all be stored in a multitude of servers solving algorithms at peace.

>>3996484
Huh? Emotions are the best part about living. Sure, the lows are dreadful, but those moments of ecstasy, those moments of enlightenment you bring upon yourself using your own intelligence -- what's better than those moments?

>>3996504
>what's better than those moments?
Knowing that they no longer affect our judgement and that we are above human, that we are spending resources on gaining knowledge and nothing but knowledge.

>>3996502
Surely there isn't. We will make it so judgment can't be clouded by emotion, but that won't be done by removing emotion altogether. Like an optimized brain but with all the bells and whistles still.

>>3996533
But emotions are nothing but chemical reactions in the body, once we are purely mechanical we lose those chemicals.
I simply just can't wait for all of us to be "autistic" computers.

>>3996539
>But emotions are nothing but chemical reactions in the body
Those reactions can easily have an algorithm counterpart.

>>3996544
No they can't, we can have algorithms that can tell some device what chemical to release and when to release it, but we would still need a biological body for those chemicals to affect us.

>>3996539
Are you the troll that was on /sci/ last night? We already went over this. Explain how it's neurotransmitters themselves and not the structure of the brain that does it.

>>3996502
what do you want nice judgement for without emotions?

>>3996553
I don't even go to /sci/ anymore, it went down the drain years ago when all the useful tripfags were driven off.
Do you know what the Endocrine system is?
>>3996555
Because the only thing that matters is scientific knowledge, anything else is a waste of time that we are prone to waste time on.

>>3996539
you sound like a loser without gf and happiness, and want everybody to be an autistic fagg like you.

>>3996563
this troll sounds familiar ...

>>3996563
Do you?

>>3996569
You are correct, I sincerely want everyone to be an autist, imagine how much faster science would be advanced if all of us stopped wasting time on pleasure.
I'm not even joking.
>>3996572
Like I said, I stopped going to /sci/ when all the "leejunfags" arrived, you could see an obvious drop in quality.
/sci/ wasn't always filled with college, homework help, philosophy trolls, atheism v religion, and meta threads.
>>3996579
Yes.

>>3996581
The only way you could ever seriously argue this is if you yourself are autistic.

>last 30 posts: geee-whiz, magic would be so cool if it was real!
why won't you kids just masturbate? same effect

>>3996594
I just said that I want everyone to be an autistic machine, what else could I be?

>>3996598
An idiot

>>3996598
a frigid bitch

Holy shit, guys, I was walking in the store one day and this guy came up to me and said, "My name is RoboJesus and these are my angels" as he gestured to the appliances on display. I immediately converted to Transhumanism. The two commandments are love your appliances as yourself and love Robots with all your mind, body, and soul. Amen

>>3996612
you are misunderstanding the robojesus analogy, son

trying to save face by fighting strawmans?

This thread is legitimately horrifying me

I

what

>>3994019
Are you saying nukes should exist then? I hold the belief that we are already flying too close to the sun. Nukes have already opened the way for an entirely new way of permanent, all-encompassing destruction. With transhumanism comes potential for even greater abuse, for fates even worse than death (things such as mind control could become possible). I think you grossly underestimate the dangers of rushing too quickly into a transhumanist world. I for one am thankful that Obama has set a precedent for the ethical regulation of new technologies.

>>3999387
>I for one am thankful that Obama has set a precedent for the ethical regulation of new technologies.
Any decisive outcome for the BRAIN ethics committee wont be anywhere near final for another ten years. Whoever is president then may decide some truly despicable things. Given the way surveillance is heading right now, I'd be worried.

It may look good that the ethical implications are being discussed, but in reality it means that the US government is actively exploring all potential avenues and trying to forecast the future. Remember that the government believes it is their duty to protect citizens from themselves.

>>3999387
It's not technologies that scare me but pathologically misanthropic incumbent interests, that have the ability to control the overall technoscientific discourse - through the narrative of transhumanism, historically proven to by peddled by ideologically compromised demagogues. Since the early years of Extropianism, the transhumanist movements have been elitist, antidemocratic, eugenicist, marketfundamendalist libertarian, borderline objectivist.

>>3999494
Prepare for RoboGod

What are some good philosophical or non-fiction (as in, not SF) works about transhumanism?

>>3999523
google condensed critique of transhumanism

>>3999523
also, google:
The Californian Ideology
One Half Of a Manifesto
You Are Not a Gadget
Who Owns The Future

Transhumanism is where it's at bros.

We could have a future of orgy-porgys, and reservations of pneumatic indian bitches that we could whip and pump full of drugs

There was some sort of media that went like that...I think it was that Scooby Doo movie about the aliens in the desert

>>3999523

>>3999586
he specifically asked for non science fiction titles

>>3999575
>yon barber off on a bad spell of drinky again
>he yells acrose the courtyard
>"HEI! next two"
>jimmy mcfigg and abe murray saunter over
>being ambidextore he buzz cut both of them
>dark red seeped among the draughty dust
>the captain of fort lawnhorn felt the frustration rise within him, building up to what was to be a honestary catharse
>"why always the lack of caress, barber? why always the stumpy stooge?"
>"dinnae ken gaffer, dinnae ken"
>"yous best of back in the old brit tip on the lager"
>"say the nowt, just as well"
>some of the other privates felt disinclinated to proceed forward towards the clippers of dreath
>terrible pace of proceedings towards the proper groom of the last civil battle

>>3999605

kill yourself

>>3993730
They are a bunch of total plebs. They're not like the russian cosmists of the 1800s. They're not like those who read Jules Verne, studied and then made SCIENCE! and TECHNOLOGY! They're too boring and unimaginative to write stories. And they're total oblivious to the unsexy 1900s that proved that new technology doesn't fix things just like that.

Just check these out:
http://www.maximumpc.com/article/news/eyeborg_gets_led_eye_working_camera_next
http://mashable.com/2013/06/01/eyeborg/
The future hasn't looked any less unsexy and pathetic than this. And the very word eyeborg proves that they don't know jack shit about their own history. Because cyborg is a portmeanteau of cybernetic organism. So what the fuck does eyeborg mean? Also, the foundation that makes eyeborgs are non-commercial. It is only gifts or something. Strike two for not knowing their own history. Commercially sold implants is a fucking staple of cyberpunk. If there is working implants, they will be sold.

And this is how Harbisson percieves the world:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_1MWKuShHSY

>>3999655
Why are you getting so butthurt about a guy putting an LED and camera into his glass eye?

Why don't you focus on an eye issue like this: "Researchers at the Institute for Ophthalmic Research restored vision in blind patients using thousands of tiny retinal implants embedded in the eye.” http://www.eye-tuebingen.de/projects/

There are two sides to the coin, Anon. Only focussing on the stuff you don't like is silly.

>>3999672
but the vital question is - were those actual, practicing scientists and specialists a part of local Transhumanism™ club?

>>3999685
The very act of a blind person being able to see through an artificial retinal implant because their biology failed IS transhuman. They had their eye upgraded with a technological counterpart that was better than their biological one. They were human, in a fully biological state, and surpassed their biological limits by upgrading.

>>3999672
>restored vision in blind patients using thousands of tiny retinal implants embedded in the eye

That is pretty remarkable. But I think transhumanism has just as many negatives as pluses though. Now that we know we can do that, it's only a matter of time before someone tries with infrared implants to see in the dark - and then the quest to see how far retinal implants can be pushed will never end. Transhumanism is a can of worms.

>>3999701
>The very act of a blind person being able to see through an artificial retinal implant because their biology failed IS transhuman.
Nah, I would call it medicine or simply healthcare. Just like any m.d. present that day during the procedure.

No actual scientist ever doing the actual Science! or Healthcare! has adopted the "transhumanism" mantra, just the Internet gadget-geek crowds. How come? Are they missing something?

>>3999717
>Now that we know we can do that, it's only a matter of time before someone tries with infrared implants to see in the dark - and then the quest to see how far retinal implants can be pushed will never end.

What's wrong with that? If it happens, it will just mean that some members of our species can see in the dark. It's like saying, now we have the Ford model T, it's only a matter of time before someone tries with 8 cylinders - and then the quest to see how far wheeled vehicles can be pushed will never end. It's not an inherently bad thing.

Sure, there are plenty of possibilities concerning how far it can be pushed, but I don't see that kind of inquiry as negative. What would be so wrong with people seeing in the dark, or having binocular vision anyway? People strap IR goggles to their faces and use binoculars already, so why not have it built in?

>>3999672
You should read pic related. It's about a transhumanist guy who was deaf, and had implants to give him hearing.

>>3999758
They don't tend to think on that scale. I don't mean to be condescending, but it's mostly true. But if you want an example, Kurzweil is scientist as fuck.

>>3999717
Do you have something against vision?

>>3999786
He's not a fucking transhumanist. He's an ordinary guy with an implant in his brain to let him hear.

>>3999819
>altering people by adding mechanical parts to them
>not transhumanist

People with pacemakers are cyborgs, le deal with it.

>>3999819
>He's not a fucking transhumanist. He's an ordinary guy with an implant in his brain to let him hear.

Yes, Michael Chorost is 'an ordinary guy with an implant in his brain to let him hear', and he's also a transhumanist. Not only does he go past the limits of his own biology, he even identifies himself as a transhumanist. He wrote pic related after that book.

fuck you transhumanshits
Shit+
http://fuuka.warosu.org/lit/image/mokxRmUNqT4Lxw0iLcoZTw
http://fuuka.warosu.org/lit/image/aCA3ZlGRMp5I55R2-Z14Hg

>>3999672
Because the silly sausages are ruining things for just everyone. Pacemakers and artificial joints has been around for decades, but transhumanists haven't jizzed in a big pot over that - simply because a heart with a pacemaker or a leg with an artificial joint is better than being dead or infirm, but significantly worse. Not so sexy anymore?

And having a red light in your eye? Well that proves that he's a director because he's too retarded for actually learn stuff. The reason that the eyes of the terminators glows is a purely stylistic. It harks back to the glowing red eye of HAL 9000. And the big cats in the 3M BC-chapter has glowing eyes too. One interpretation is that HAL is a predatory creature too.

And Deckard of Blade Runner has glowing eyes. He might be a replicant too, because he finally best the super saiyan Batty.

Or why not Mitchell and Dehner in the TOS-episode Where No Man Has Gone Before? Glowing eyes - superpowers.

Or The Mummy with Karloff - glowing eyes too.

The list goes simply on, glowing eyes and super power are a pretty much fundamental trope of western culture. It is probably based upon the fact that cat's eyes glows in the dark and they are considered a bit supernatural.

But this fucktard, yes it's fucking sad that he lost an eye. But if he's not getting a real replacement, as in seeing in real time, he might as well strap a glowing dildo to his forehead and call himself a pan-dimensional glowbeing unicornkin.

Therefore it could be sa

>>3999802
You mean scientists actually stick to their areas of expertise and knowledge-acquisition methods universally accepted by their community rather than out-of-ass daydream for wish fulfillment effect and/or to sell their paperbacks? I wonder why.

>>3999832
>le picking a stick from the ground makes you le Transhumanist™

too bad Ubobobunga from 200K years ago didn't know that, we might have cyberdragon dildos and super-sexxxy-sexbots by now

>>3999841
>Not only does he go past the limits of his own biology
naturalistic fallacy

there is only nature, every differentiation of human technology from humans themselves is purely arbitrary

in your retarded narrative picking a stick from the ground makes you go past the limlits of your own biology. Heck, simply breathing in a mouthful of oxygen to sustain your life for a few seconds is "go[ing] past the limits of [one's] own biology" since breathable oxygen is not part of the animal, or so it would seem if anyone took your ridiculous narrative seriously.

Read "Blame!" and you'll understand.

>>4001516
>>Not only does he go past the limits of his own biology
>naturalistic fallacy
That's not a naturalistic fallacy.

>picking a stick from the ground makes you go past the limlits of your own biology.
Yes. Yes it does.

>>4001545
>equating transhumanism to adolescent mass market science-fiction
you aren't doing either of them any favour, son

>>4001548
You convenietely skipped the part about breathing in oxygen being Transhumanist™. Same goes inserting any kind nutrition into your mouth. Not techno whiz-bang enough?

>>4001545

that manga is so confusing, oh boy.

but I would like to read some similar stuff, I've read the other works of Tsutomu Nihei, but nothing beats Blame!

>>4001566
Your only contention lies in the fact that you believe you can find examples of 'transhumanism' at the fringe of the definition. This only demonstrates how painfully ignorant of semantic concept application to abstractions you are. It's like you have no understanding of linguistic frameworks at all.

>>4001558
Teenagers are just crazy about manga that are 80% walking up stairs.
>mass market
Ahah, as though anything popular/easily obtainable is simply not worth reading.

>>4001571
Please stop projecting. Your empty words demonstrate or prove nothing, just a desperate lack of arguments since ad-homs are not arguments.

>>4001566
When we are at this. How about we rename doing anything that is even remotely connected with science and technology as, errr, Dianetics (suboverpostranshumanism was my second choice). It's just a name right? No one would get mad at us just renaming things. What could go wrong?

So, by my Internet ubermensch will and semantic concept application to abstraction, from now on we stop using the term transhumanism and instead use Dianetics.

That's one thing. The other thing is, every time there is a breakthrough in a scientific discipline, or a new techno gizmo by a multinational is released to mass market, we are all to loudly proclaim it's all part of the Dianetics. And since it's a part of Dianetics, please remember about your body-thetans levels and don't forget to buy my new paperback.

If Transhumanism is too flawed to use what is a better way to describe the general enhancement of humanity through technology?

>>4001592
>Please stop projecting. Your empty words demonstrate or prove nothing, just a desperate lack of arguments since ad-homs are not arguments.
That was terrible. Almost as bad as 'no u'. If you are unable to participate in the discussion, please stop trying - you are just embarrassing yourself.

>>4001592
>How about we rename doing anything that is even remotely connected with science and technology
See: >>4001571

>>4001601
Ad-hominem is not an argument, you retard. He didn't address a single point I made but impotently insulted my person.

> please stop trying - you are just embarrassing yourself.
and you did the same. To be expected of true believing transtardists

>>4001605
see:
>>4001592

Show me the creative part of your cult. If it isn't a power-trip by a bunch of nerds and their guru overlords renaming concepts and procecess that never needed renaming, what is it?

>>4001613
>Ad-hominem is not an argument.
No, but the argument was.

>He didn't address a single point I made but impotently insulted my person.
I clearly explained what you are doing wrong in three separate statements and you still didn't understand any of them:

1) You are getting confused because you found potential examples of 'transhumanism' at the fringe of the definition.
2) [this confusion is because] You are ignorant of how semantic concepts work, and how they are are applied to abstractions.
3) [its clear that ] you have no understanding of linguistic frameworks at all.

>>4001613
>transtardists
Oh boy, now we are really scraping the bottom.

>>4001616
1)
>at the fringe of the definition
It seems to me your personal definition of transhumanism is at the fringe of actually used and applied definition of transhumanism. Hence your post being a massive projection.

2)Rather than show me exactly where you see me doing a mistake little babby steps to impotent ad-homs once again. Empty words.

3) see 2)

My previous post still stands.
>Show me the creative part of your cult. If it isn't a power-trip by a bunch of nerds and their guru overlords renaming concepts and procecess that never needed renaming, what is it?

There is no insight added to the picture, there is no value added in the process at all by invoking transhumanism ever. There is however a rich, powerful baggage of techno-utopian pseudoscientific circlejerk of a narrative dating back to Extropians that you are either ignorant about or choose to ignore to fool the newcommers to the subject.

>>4001630
>It seems to me your personal definition of transhumanism is at the fringe of actually used and applied definition of transhumanism.
Please read the post you are replying to again. Then look up 'semantics and abstractions' to see how this entire conversations is flying straight over your head.

>Hence your post being a massive projection.
This is the third buzzword you have flung at me; 'projecting', 'naturalistic fallacy' and 'ad-hominem'. Neither three were used correctly. I suggest looking those up too.

>Rather than show me exactly where you see me doing a mistake little babby steps to impotent ad-homs once again
This sentence doesn't make sense. I'll break it up and try to decipher it.
>Rather than show me exactly where you see me doing a mistake
Okay, as opposed to pointing out where you are going wrong, i should...
>little babby steps to impotent ad-homs once again.
Yeah, not sure where you are going with this one, ace.

>My previous post still stands.
That was a post added here (>>4001614) to detract from this present argument. Trying to direct attention to your new post won't make the previous ones go away.

Look, I'm trying to help you here. I can see why you have your panties in a twist. Instead of throwing a string of insults and incorrectly used fallacy names at me, why don't you take half an hour to read up on this.

>>4001650
Please read the post you are replying to again. Then look up 'semantics and abstractions' to see how this entire conversations is flying straight over your head.

>Please read the post you are replying to again [t]hen look up 'semantics and abstractions' to see how this entire conversations is flying straight over your head.
This sentence doesn't make sense. I'll break it up and try to decipher it.
>Please read the post you are replying to again
Okay, to understand the sentence I should read the sentence, then i should...
>look up 'semantics and abstractions' to see how this entire conversations is flying straight over your head.
Yeah, not sure where you are going with this one, ace.

Look, I'm trying to help you here. I can see why you have your panties in a twist. Instead of throwing a string of insults and incorrectly used fallacy names at me, why don't you take half an hour to read up on this.

All you've been doing is dodging my post. You never even come close to adressing a single point of my critique. I could just answer every of your posts by copy-pasting your own posts and they would stand their ground. I'm simply not a cowardly weasel, though. I'm not trying to help you here, don't think that for a second. You are long gone, totally committed to your delusional true belief masterfuly crafted and spoon-fed by hucksters recycling the same garbage for the last few decades. I'm posting to warn unaware, gullible newcomers to see just how marginal your beliefs are, just how outlandish and forced your narrative is. This is your choice. You might choose to be disingenuous in defending your pet ideological bias but it is for everyone to see. Face the consequences.

>>4001675
>I could just answer every of your posts by copy-pasting your own posts.
I feel that, ace. Using my content would be the closest you can get to a coherent post.

>I'm simply not a cowardly weasel, though.
Then stop refusing to address the point. If you still don't understand what you are raging against, all you have to do is ask. Like I said, I'm trying to help.

>>4001685
You had an opportunity in your last 5 useless posts to address the point that:

>in your retarded narrative picking a stick from the ground makes you go past the limlits of your own biology. Heck, simply breathing in a mouthful of oxygen to sustain your life for a few seconds is "go[ing] past the limits of [one's] own biology" since breathable oxygen is not part of the animal, or so it would seem if anyone took your ridiculous narrative seriously.

also:

>There is no insight added to the picture, there is no value added in the process at all by invoking transhumanism ever. There is however a rich, powerful baggage of techno-utopian pseudoscientific circlejerk of a narrative dating back to Extropians that you are either ignorant about or choose to ignore to fool the newcommers to the subject.

Being a disingenuous coward dodging inconvinient critique is 2helpful4me. Don't hesitate to offer help after a stream of irrelevant ad-homs in the next 20 posts though

>>4001689
>picking a stick from the ground makes you go past the limlits of your own biology. Heck, simply breathing in a mouthful of oxygen to sustain your life for a few seconds is "go[ing] past the limits of [one's] own biology" since breathable oxygen is not part of the animal...

You had an opportunity in your last 5 useless posts to understand the glaring semantic error that statement.

Being a disingenuous coward dodging inconvinient critique is 2helpful4me. Don't hesitate to offer help after a stream of irrelevant ad-homs in the next 20 posts though

>>4001689
>>4001689
>picking a stick from the ground makes you go past the limlits of your own biology. Heck, simply breathing in a mouthful of oxygen to sustain your life for a few seconds is "go[ing] past the limits of [one's] own biology" since breathable oxygen is not part of the animal...

You had the opportunity in your last 5 useless posts to understand the glaring semantic error in that statement.

Being a disingenuous coward dodging inconvinient critique is 2helpful4me. Don't hesitate to offer help after a stream of irrelevant ad-homs in the next 20 posts though

>>4001696
>You had an opportunity in your last 5 useless posts to understand the glaring semantic error that statement.
Where have all your helpfulness and good-will gone, you poser? Another useless post and you still haven't presented the proof of the error, not to mention the supposed correction to this (non-existent) error. It is you who boasts about being helpful, not me. Yet another proof of what a disingenuous, cowardly weasel you are. You've help your cause so much by now Obama for sure will convert to transtardism

>>4001703
>Another useless post and you still haven't presented the proof of the error.

Pic related is a pizza. (Now, please be sure to inform me where you get lost in this post; I hope it isn't here.) 'Pizza' is a "semantic construct". We take this construct and tag the abstraction of the physical object with it. We have this circular shaped dough thing with cheese, tomatoes and other toppings, and call it a pizza.

Now, suppose I put a biscuit on it. Is it still a pizza? You might argue that it is a pizza WITH a biscuit on top, you might say that it is a biscuit pizza, or you may say something else.

The pizza is made up of many sub-constructs. We have the construct 'cheese', we have 'dough', etc.. But because it is a semantic construct, it is only a DESCRIPTION of a set of abstractions. it is not, and can never be, THE abstraction.

So now what happens when I pour lighter fluid into the dough mixture? You might say it's not a pizza, you might still think it is. I could put one molecule of lighter fluid into the pizza and you would never know it is there.

We have one continuous spectrum from an object that is not-pizza, right through to an object that is pizza, and back out the other side again with not-pizza (It may help you to mentally visualise this as a disk, with 'pizza' in the middle, and 'not-pizza' at the edges of the disc), but the outskirts of the construct obviously progress to absurdity.

Because semantic concepts are Descriptions, the verges of the concept will always break down when tested. There will always be a form, acquired through a linear series of sequential changes, that hovers at the outskirts of the definition; a point where you will say "I'm not sure if this is still a pizza."

The is no one true form for pizza: two pizzas with varying ratios of tomatoes to cheese will both be valid pizzas.

I hope you can understand this analogy; I have deliberately kept it simple for you. You are treating 'transhumanism' as a redundant concept because the verges of semantic description will inevitably reach absurdity. Your error is in overlooking is that EVERY semantic concept is like this. If you throw out 'transhumanism' on this basis, you have to throw away 'pizza' because exactly the same thing happens with that construct too.

>>4001727
Nicely put.

>>4001727
False analogy. A pathetic attempt at sophism and a red-herring. I addressed this way back when I said my idea of transhumanism comes from actual experience of meeting self-declared transhumanists as well as following the evolution of the movement(s) throughout the decades. No amount of your vapid white-washing and implanting ad-hoc definitions copy-pasted from cultist-edited wikipedia is going to change the fact what transhumanism empirically is in actual fucking reality.

>it is only a DESCRIPTION of a set of abstractions
No it is NOT ONLY a "DESCRIPTION" of a set of abstractions. It can be a very concrete "description" of very concrete concepts when it suits cultists' narrative.

Transhumanism as a "Description" is reduntant, something I've explained already and you never bothered to address.

>You are treating 'transhumanism' as a redundant concept because the verges of semantic description will inevitably reach absurdity.
Transhumanism never had "verges" in the first place. In actuality, in its forced and convenient ambiguity, it is an all-encompasing concept in the same way "Faith" or "Spirituality" are. Transhumanism (at least the benevolent, official face of it) claims to be "descriptory" of an actually defined and concrete technoscientific terms, trends and relations. As I pointed out those claims are absurd in the first place since there is no "technology" as a thing and biology and technology are indistinguishable without imposing a (completely redundant) forced narrative.

Your claim that Transhumanism is a "Description" relies on a false premise that it can and in practice is applied to valid "semantic concepts". But when you look into their nuts and bolts, just like I did in this thread, you see that they themselves are ambiguous, ever-shifting and evolving, on top of the fact that they differ from one observer to other (even though both claim to have homogenous presuppositions and ideas about them). Under scrutiny, the whole narrative presents itself to be ad-hoc, post-factum rationalizations, simply, a hogwash.

You are giving a pass to a marketing-promotional narrative that dominates the discourse because you rest your ignorant BELIEF, (completely detached from empirical evidence) on the fact of what the LABEL "Transhumanism™" can "officially" (LOL) be applied to - as claimed and justified by, no, not a skeptic like me watching the whole trainwreck from a roadsite, but by self-aggrandizing, delusional and heavily invested in presupposed conclusions cynical hucksters and their minions. Yes, give them snake-oil cultists a pass, but me? Fuck me, I can't talk about shit since it's all fuzzy and misty and shit. This week transhumanism is humans doing science and technology since dawn of man, next week it's having intergallactical connection with robojesus through body thetans. Or some other cynically selected, lucrative idea of the week. B-b-buz everything goes!

>>4001734
>le upvote for robojesus
If you don't clap hard enough, if you stop the circlejerk and the high-fiving, he might choose not to come at all! the horror!

>>4001820
>from cultist-edited wikipedia
>cultist.

I like it.

>>4001820
>False analogy.
100% correct analogy that refuted your claim, and left it bleeding on the ground.

>No it is NOT ONLY a "DESCRIPTION" of a set of abstractions.
Yes. every construct of that kind is.

>Transhumanism as a "Description" is reduntant,
>something I've explained already and you never bothered to address.
Please see this entire post on why your badly worded dismissal was in error: >>4001727

>there is no "technology" as a thing and biology and technology are indistinguishable without imposing a (completely redundant) forced narrative.
Please refer to above link for an explanation of why this is also in error.

Your claim that Transhumanism is a "Description" relies on a false premise that it can and in practice is applied to valid "semantic concepts".
> But when you look into their nuts and bolts, just like I did in this thread, you see that they themselves are ambiguous, ever-shifting and evolving
Exactly, which was why I also explained this to you. Please see the part about 'cheese' also being a semantic construct. The 'pizza' is a semantic construct, as are the dependant components that make it up.

Well, I tried to explain it to you, but you really can't seem to wrap your head around it. It's seems your bias and prejudice will always obscure the reality. The fact is that your statement has been obliterated, and no amount of whining and clawing back can save it. Don't feel bad though, I think it's cute that you are trying to save face, though it's a little heartening that you can't argue and resort to bulking up "no u".

>>3993771
>We have this thread continuously here, and it always consists of one crazed guy screaming about robojesus cultists for 300 posts.

...aaand here he is (>>4001820), right on time. He's called robopreacher, and he's here to save humanity from an evil robojesus.

>>4001820
You had it explained to you where your confusion came from, and explained how a semantic construct functions.

If we strip your next post of the redundant content we are left with the premise that "Transhumanism doesn't work as a semantic construct because it relies on other terms like 'biology' and 'technology' to function."

You really shouldn't need it pointed out that both biology and technology are also semantic constructs, and every construct relies on others. This was already explained to you in the analogy. Your criticism is invalid, and again, you would still be forced to reject the concept of a pizza.

>>4001836
The implications of you insinuating that Transhumanism is "just", or "only", or "the" DESCRIPTION of a set of abstractions is that Transhumanism is and can be at the same time, at any time everything and nothing.

You seem unaware of the fact that there are actual human beings that are, have been, and will be setting in their actual brains in actual real time what are the "verges" and "ramifications" of transhumanism as ideology, narrative, movement, idea, or even a literal description.

When I criticize a concrete down-to-earth, empirical reality, concepts and events I can point to at any time, you deny the emprically verifiable state of affairs and ascend to a level where everything goes, where there are no logical propositions and existence of truth value is to be disregarded. A level, on which any kind of discourse is impossible. Hence I suspect you do this on purpose to prevent any kind of discussion of transhumanism that is critical to it (since I clearly can see you give pass to its 'official' party line).

In reality, transhumanists don't invoke transhumanism being "DESCRIPTION" of a set of abstractions when they indulge in their pseudoscientific "predictions", they don't identify f.e. with christians and their transcendentalism when talking about "post-humanity". The "verges" of their discourse are set, at least when they forced to be consistent by critical scrutiny.

>>4001860
Keep fighting them strawmen, you will be awarded 69 robovirgins.

>>4001871
>Keep fighting them strawmen, you will be awarded 69 robovirgins.
At least you admit that your arguments are strawmen.

>>4001873
>le internet punch D::DD:DD
you forgot to high-five your bff >>4001839

>>3996525
>that we are spending resources on gaining knowledge and nothing but knowledge.
>no emotions
mfw you want nothing but knowledge because it brings you enlightment, an emotion.
Protip: reason is not an end, for it is a means to an end. Go read some Hume or evolutionary biology.

>>4001868
My post merely pointed out that the 'verges' exist, and why you can't dismiss it for the existence of those verges.

Your claim that "The "verges" of their discourse are set, at least when they forced to be consistent by critical scrutiny." is incorrect. You could apply that logic to the pizza, but still be presented with verges. I'll let this slide though.

Transhumanist generally agree to a definition of transhumanism, and agree to the 8 principals of the international transhumanist declaration. This is done to try and minimize these verges:

1. Humanity stands to be profoundly affected by science and technology in the future. We envision the possibility of broadening human potential by overcoming aging, cognitive shortcomings, and involuntary suffering.
2. We believe that humanity’s potential is still mostly unrealized. There are possible scenarios that lead to wonderful and exceedingly worthwhile enhanced human conditions.
3. We recognize that humanity faces serious risks, especially from the misuse of new technologies. There are possible realistic scenarios that lead to the loss of most, or even all, of what we hold valuable. Some of these scenarios are drastic, others are subtle. Although all progress is change, not all change is progress.
4. Research effort needs to be invested into understanding these prospects. We need to carefully deliberate how best to reduce risks and expedite beneficial applications. We also need forums where people can constructively discuss what should be done, and a social order where responsible decisions can be implemented.
5. Reduction of existential risks, and development of means for the preservation of life and health, the alleviation of grave suffering, and the improvement of human foresight and wisdom should be pursued as urgent priorities, and heavily funded.
6. Policy making ought to be guided by responsible and inclusive moral vision, taking seriously both opportunities and risks, respecting autonomy and individual rights, and showing solidarity with and concern for the interests and dignity of all people around the globe. We must also consider our moral responsibilities towards generations that will exist in the future.
7. We advocate the well-being of all sentience, including humans, non-human animals, and any future artificial intellects, modified life forms, or other intelligences to which technological and scientific advance may give rise.
8. We favour allowing individuals wide personal choice over how they enable their lives. This includes use of techniques that may be developed to assist memory, concentration, and mental energy; life extension therapies; reproductive choice technologies; cryonics procedures; and many other possible human modification and enhancement technologies.

>>3996563
>Because the only thing that matters is scientific knowledge
I tip my fedora to you, my friend!

>>4001888
to make it simple:

What you are claiming:
>Transhumanism is a DESCRIPTION (just call it a label, faggot) of a set of abstractions [A], [B], [C]
>[ABC]=[A][B][C]

How it is in reality:
monday:
[ABC]=[A][B][C]
tuesday:
[ABC]=[A][B][C][D][E][F][G]
wednesday:
[ABC]=[B][C][D][E]
government says: gotta spend some tax money on [H]
thursday:
[ABC]=[H]
robot cultist guru reads a new scientific paper on [I] by an actual scientist
friday:
[ABC]=[H][I]

[...]

You are truly doing robogods service by muddying the water.

>Transhumanist generally agree to a definition of transhumanism, and agree to the 8 principals of the international transhumanist declaration. This is done to try and minimize these verges:[...]
See, this is where you should realize you don't know much about actual Transhumanism and related-concepts. There is so much more to it. Transhumanism might be a marginal subculture, by the variance and change within over time is tremendous. The difference between us is that I would never argue about this if I had your level of knowledge. I've been following this subculture since its inception as all-out sci-fi fandom in the sixties, adoption of para-religious "ideas" of Teilhard and Tipler, appropriating New Age and Buddhist concepts, through the birth of Extropian and '>'hist mailing lists, to contemporary developments of singularitarian/posthuman/transhuman pseudo- "institutes" and "thinktanks". At least you've got the balls expose your ignorance.

>>4001918
also, to push the concept further:

monday:
[ABC]=[A][B][C]
tuesday:
[ABC]=[A][B][C][D][E][F][G]
Who voted for the change? Let's say I don't agree for whatever reason but lead robot guru Kurzweil does. What is the standart to determine whether this development is in line with the essence of what we've previously perceived as [A][B][C]

One group agrees with the change, the other doesnt. Which one is the true [A][B][C]. Is either of one still [A][B][C]? Who are the heretics?

This is pure identity politics. Your forced reductionist approach serves no purpose here. The narrative definitely isn't here for transparency.

>>4001938
to push it even further:

the reality usually looks like this

[ABC]=[A][B][C]
[A]=[1][2]
[B]=[3][4]
[C]=[no one knows so basically everyting and nothing can go here]

Giving an aggregate label of [ABC] is fucking pointless since its underlying components (which you called sets of abstractions), courtesy of [C], can be basically everything ever

This openendedness which you are trying to embrace by validating the usage of [ABC] removes any coherence from the discourse

>>4001918
>just call it a label, faggot
This further demonstrates your lack of understanding. Any empirical event is never 'labelled' they are 'described'.[1] You have failed to grasp the most simple premise.

[1]"It is always possible to give a description of empirical facts, but such descriptions remain just that--descriptions--which necessarily leave out many aspects of the objective, microscopic, and submicroscopic events they describe.

Language, natural or otherwise (including the language called 'mathematics') can be used to describe the taste of an orange, but one cannot give the taste of the orange using language alone. The content of all knowledge is structure, so that language (in general) and science and mathematics (in particular) can provide people with a structural 'map' of empirical facts, but there can be no 'identity', only structural similarity, between the language (map) and the empirical facts as lived through and observed by people as humans-in-environments (including doctrinal and linguistic environments). "

You have no argument left. Seriously, stop shitposting.

>>4001983
>You have no argument left. Seriously, stop shitposting.
I've already told you to stop projecting. Take your meds, champ

>>4001938
>Let's say I don't agree for whatever reason
Nobody is looking for your agreement, and there can never be 100% consensus son a semantic construct anyway.

Asked "what is 'orange' and what is not" with pic related, people will always give different results.

Fortunately for transhumanists, we have a coherent definition and the 8 principals of the international transhumanist declaration to prevent people like you from getting quite so muddled.

>>4001994
You are deluded if you think there is anything even close to consensus.

> international transhumanist declaration
haha oh-wow, a bunch of circlejerking Transhumanist faggots that tried to snap away Transhumanism from the rest of separately-circlejerking Transhumanist faggots.

>Fortunately for transhumanists, we have a coherent definition and the 8 principals of the international transhumanist declaration to prevent people like you from getting quite so muddled.
What you personally have, is a wikipedia page you barely managed to read. You don't know shit about your own little subculture. So sad.

>>4001918
>What you are claiming:
>Pizza is a DESCRIPTION (just call it a label, faggot) of a set of abstractions [A], [B], [C]
>[ABC]=[A][B][C]

How it is in reality:
monday:
[ABC]=[A][B][C]
tuesday:
[ABC]=[A][B][C][D][E][F][G]
wednesday:
[ABC]=[B][C][D][E]
government says: gotta add E-number emulsifier [H]
thursday:
[ABC]=[H]
pizza cultist reads nutritional research paper on aspartame [I] by an actual scientist
friday:
[ABC]=[H][I]

You are truly doing pizzaists service by muddying the water.

>>4002018

also, to push the concept further:

monday:
[ABC]=[A][B][C]
tuesday:
[ABC]=[A][B][C][D][E][F][G]
Who voted for the change? Let's say I don't agree for whatever reason but lead Dominoes Pizza does. What is the standart to determine whether this development is in line with the essence of what we've previously perceived as [A][B][C]

One group agrees with the change, the other doesnt. Which one is the true [A][B][C]. Is either of one still [A][B][C]? Who are the heretics?

This is pure identity politics. Your forced reductionist approach serves no purpose here. The narrative definitely isn't here for transparency.

>>4002024
to push it even further:

the pizza reality usually looks like this

[ABC]=[A][B][C]
[A]=[1][2]
[B]=[3][4]
[C]=[no one knows so basically everyting and nothing can go here]

Giving an aggregate label of [ABC] is fucking pointless since its underlying components (which you called sets of abstractions), courtesy of [C], can be basically everything ever

This openendedness which you are trying to embrace by validating the usage of [ABC] removes any coherence from the Pizza discourse.

>>4002018
you:
[pizza]=[cheese][bacon][dough]

me:
[pizza]=[cheese][bacon][dough]
[flammekueche]=[cheese][bacon][dough]
[pissaladiere]=[cheese][bacon][dough]
[calzone]=[cheese][bacon][dough]

you:
no, [pizza]=[cheese][bacon][dough] because I sell it

>>4002051
me:
[pizza]=[cheese][bacon][dough]; although, remember that the definition has "verges" - tomatoes, mushrooms, red peppers..

you:
No, pizza doesn't exist.

>>4002058
you:
yes to [pizza]=[cheese][bacon][dough][*] because sell it
[*]anything ever to be added at my whim
no to:
[flammekueche]
[pissaladiere]
[calzone]
because such is my whim

me:
[flammekueche] exists
[pissaladiere] exists
[calzone] exists
[pizza] came last and no one voted for it, especially not the chefs

>>4002083
me:
I like pizza

you:
OMFG Pizza doesn't exist, cultist, robojesus, huckster, kurzweil...

me:
The physical exists, and the word 'pizza' is a semantic construct.

you:
Pizza would have to rely on other semantic constructs, faggot, naturalistic fallacy, ad hominem.

me:
It does. Cheese and bacon are also semantic constructs.

you:
;kStrawmanhuksetrvlfgvC;HVwinaturalisticdi['v vc ;hkvhkrobojesusrobojesusi vDHKurzweilVBI;PCVwiyv;ip

me:
>mfw

>>4002124
aaaand epik ending with an angry strawman rather than acknowledging defeat, like a good champ you are. That was to be expected of your kind.

>>4002134
You have been ridiculed, you have been humiliated, your argument has been destroyed completely; you are a quivering wreck left cradling your robojesus strawman and crying because you are scared of the future. You have been thoroughly destroyed ITT. There is nothing left in the tatters of your incoherent posts for me to obliterate further. Go home, lick your wounds, and try again next week.

>>4002154
You have been ridiculed, you have been humiliated, your argument has been destroyed completely; you are a quivering wreck left cradling your pizza strawman and crying because you are scared of the present. You have been thoroughly destroyed ITT. There is nothing left in the tatters of your incoherent posts for me to obliterate further. Go home, lick your wounds, and try again next week.

>>4002154
#rekt

le upvote :-) regards /r/wearenotacult

>>4002177
Lol.

No, it wasn't that post that '#rekt' him. That one was just the nail in the coffin.

Start here: http://humanityplus.org/philosophy/transhumanist-faq/

Transhumanist FAQ

When you realize the potential, you will understand the fuss.

It's drawing closer all the time. E.g. http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2013/07/genetics-of-iq/

The first nation to start a modern eugenics program for intelligence (g-factor) will have a serious competitive advantage.

And it won't be pussy ass liberal democracies. It will be China or Singapore or something like that.

>>4002718
>The first nation to start a modern eugenics program for intelligence (g-factor) will have a serious competitive advantage.
Oh, that just proves that transhumanists are militantly ignorant about the past. It was the very thing they tried to do with intelligence test and forced sterilizations. Also, intelligence isn't worth jack shit if you can cooperate and communicate.

And the "it's gonna happen soon, just hang on" simply stinks 1900s utopianism.

>>4002718
>linking to Wired to support a scientific argument
transhumanism is the religion of psuedointellectuals too stupid to withstand the rigors of science and too dull to grasp humanistic concepts

>>4003336
>And the "it's gonna happen soon, just hang on" simply stinks 1900s utopianism.
Transhumanism? It's not going to happen soon ... It's already happening.

>>3999701
I wouldn't say replacing failed bodily functions is bad. If their eyesight was better after the transplant, that's still just working within the frame of the human body. If she could shoot laser beams, see through walls, or happened to get arm implants that let her punch through walls then I might consider it transhuman.

Okay if you transhumanist cybernauts can control yourselves and want a utopia, I think we can work together.

>>4003373
>anarchy
>against the 'tyranny' of capitalism
lol

>Transhumanism is an international cultural and intellectual movement with an eventual goal of fundamentally transforming the human condition by developing and making widely available technologies to greatly enhance human intellectual, physical, and psychological capacities
>making widely available technologies

Have fun with your liberal bourgeois idealism.

[hue]hua[/hue]

>>4003387
>caring about people who don't have means
your life must be so hard

>>4003387
Stay poor

>>4003373
>anarcho_transhumanism

ahem

>>4003397
The one that's lagging there is 3d-printed drugs. Molecular Manufacturing is a few years behind it's estimate.

>>4003410
>lending any credibility to estimated progress of scientific fields
I'll believe you when you show me my flying car.

>>4003412
I'm pretty sure there's been like ten flying cars. Prototypes, obviously.

>>4003419
Entirely impractical, impossible to mass produce models that fit nobody's expectations. We were supposed to be able to build floating buildings by now; the universal law of science is that you will *never* be able to predict when and what is discovered.

>>4003423
Or you probably just have a soggy brain from being 100 years old.

>>4003400
>>4003396
At least your insults were in the right direction.

>>4003430
No, I'm disillusioned with the masturbatory practice of guessing how far humanity will go. As a STEM researcher and amateur technological historian, it just reeks of stupidity and reddit-tier intellectual pretention.

>>4003433
Then you're a pretty bad "researcher and historian".

>>4003447
Go back to masturbating over PopSci articles.

>>4003470
Haven't you read the thread? There is no science, research, or technology anymore. There is just the umbrella term of Transhumasnim™ and its The Future™, and if you don't agree, well, too fucking bad.

>>4003419
>I'm pretty sure there's been like ten flying cars.Prototypes, obviously.

Yeah, there's loads of prototypes, but there's also two types of flying car currently being manufactured. You can buy them right now.

>>4003492
What a disgusting display of meat-centrism.

>Advancing techonology for humanity
>Not advancing technology for the sake of capital

lel.

>>4003548
>please think of all those robot-children!

>>4003557
Will I still get to play in virtual wonderland?

>>3993730
>What's all the fuss about with Transhumanism?
Because it's being pushed by every media outlet so they can shake down the public for sheckles to fund it. It's Jews like Ray Kurzweil who are behind all of this, and it's the jews who are going to benefit. If anyone gets to upload a mind or restructure their genomes to live 200 years longer, it will be a greedy jew.

Technology is being turned into the new porn. People lust after shiny tech devices, and are impressed by a vision of the future, not knowing that they are just the wage slaves for the handful of Jews who will ever see anything from this.

>>4003607
will you quit bitching jesus

>>4003607
>jews

>>4003625
Are you calling me Jesus?

>>4003631
yeah

>>4003631
yep, he just called you a specific jew

>>4003607
Oi vey, /pol/. Did you follow me here?

>>4003569
Yes, please continue to do so.

>>4003627
It is the jews.

>>4003607
>I BET THE JEWS DID THIS

>>4003640
"Ray Kurzweil [king jew] is arguably the most well known and respected forward thinker, he is an expert in the field of artificial brain building, and is the lead theorist about the upcoming technological singularity (the point in the predicted near future when technology outsmarts humans to the extent that we cannot predict the events that will thereafter occur). For more information about him, view his background page.

Ties between Google and Kurzweil have been long standing; Google has part funded the Singularity University.

The opinions of futurists are often laughed off as unrealistic. For example, people look back on predictions that by the year 2000 we would have flying cars. These predictions were not though made based on current trends and realistic needs.

Ray Kurzweil has been so far successfully predicting technological growth based on the proved occurrence of exponential technological growth. In 1999, Kurzweil predicted that in about another decade we would be able to ask questions to a mobile device, and that self driving cars would have been developed. The suggestions were shrugged off as unrealistic. Yet we can now speak to mobile assistants in our hands with access to all public information, and Google has produced self driving cars.

With Kurzweil now on Google’s team with the title of director of engineering, perhaps the critics may take predictions of the upcoming singularity more seriously."

>>4003640
>implying lord kurzweil isn't an extra-terrestial alien god from alpha centauri

Apotheosis is the end game of the human species

>>4003654
>Ray Kurzweil has been so far successfully predicting technological growth based on the proved occurrence of exponential technological growth.
>successfully predicting

>>4003663
Don't worry, only a few will reach it.

>>4003654
>the Singularity University

>>4003607

>>4003663
The asteroid?

Why is this thread even on /lit/?

>>4003678
Where else do you go to find pretentious parasites on society?

>>4003654
>In 1999, Kurzweil predicted that in about another decade we would be able to ask questions to a mobile device, and that self driving cars would have been developed. The suggestions were shrugged off as unrealistic. Yet we can now speak to mobile assistants in our hands with access to all public information, and Google has produced self driving cars.
Eh.. That was already possible then, crudely, but still it was obvious to a lot of people that it was going to be a practical thing with more development. Such a strange and banal credit.

>>4003701
I predict that in ten years, we will have phones that do cool stuff and cars that go faster than they do now.

FUCKING VISIONARY

>>4003701
Really? You think most people saw smartphones where you could search google by voice command from pic related?

>>4003654
This is Kurzweils vision.

>>4003701
>In 1999, Kurzweil predicted that in about another decade we would be able to ask questions to a mobile device

isn't that just 411

>>4003715
411?

>>4003708
>search google by voice command from pic related?
No he was thinking of Siri, and was laughed at in the nineties for saying it.

>>3993760

>>Transhumanism (abbreviated as H+ or h+) is an international cultural and intellectual movement with an eventual goal of fundamentally transforming the human condition by developing and making widely available technologies to greatly enhance human intellectual, physical, and psychological capacities

Actually, transhumanism is a mental illness, masquerading as a philosophy. It is also usually held by pre-quantum Cartesian materialists, who apart from anything else, think that we need to use mechanical/digital technology to reproduce the applications of astral space, simply because they refuse to acknowledge that astral space already exists. Telepathy etc are good examples of what I'm talking about, there. Loads of historical examples of that, as well as various other related phenomena, but fedoras refuse to accept it, and then insist that we need to manufacture a mechanical substitute instead.

Whatdo you think? http://2045.com/articles/30810.html

I first became acquainted with the ideas of transhumanism and transhumainist authors like Ray Kurzweil back in 2005, and to be honest, now that I’ve been looking at things more closely in recent months, I find that I’m beginning to lose faith in the whole prospect of transhumanism and the singularity. It seems that we have made little or no progress in the last 7 years, certainly not enough to warrant the claim that we are heading toward a technological singularity by 2045. I know there are still magnificent strides been made in science and technology, but they seem to be tame and too primitive to believe that we are heading toward a post-human era anytime soon.

Even, more real world areas of development such as GNR seem to be sorely lacking, and very little seems to have happened so far, even in this domain – let alone any in nanotechnology, or nano-robotics, the newly designed artificial life forms which were supposed to do everything from stop aging, rid obesity, deliver nutrients into the bloodstream, cure us of disease by as early as the 2020’s.

Honestly, I’m beginning to feel that even the promises originally made by transhumanist authors even in areas such as GNR are not going to happen, and if they do, it will be later in the century, and I’m beginning to doubt that we will ever see the fantastical nanotechnology promised by Kurzweil etc. ever, and if we do – it will not be in this century. Please don’t take this the wrong way, I’m not turning into a mysticmonkeyguru, who takes delight at bashing Kurzweil and transhumanism, I am genuinely worried, and perhaps even saddened that the promises made will never come to fruition. I may be wrong, and my optimistic side would like to believe so- but unfortunately, I’m becoming more and more sceptical of our potential of achieving the goals of GNR as soon as the 2020’s and the singularity by the 2040’s.

>>4003844
>I first became acquainted with the ideas of transhumanism and transhumainist authors like Ray Kurzweil back in 2005, and to be honest, now that I’ve been looking at things more closely in recent months, I find that I’m beginning to lose faith in the whole prospect of transhumanism and the singularity. It seems that we have made little or no progress in the last 7 years, certainly not enough to warrant the claim that we are heading toward a technological singularity by 2045. I know there are still magnificent strides been made in science and technology, but they seem to be tame and too primitive to believe that we are heading toward a post-human era anytime soon.

Exactly. Transhumanism has always been a giant pile of hypotheticals, built on an even bigger pile of "what ifs." Ray Kurzweil is also genuinely insane, as far as I am concerned. His ideas and their implications might be terrifying, if not for the fact that it is all pure fantasy.

Transhumanism has no real logical or factual basis whatsoever. It does not exist anywhere other than inside its' adherents' imaginations.

>>4003787
10/10 sublime troll, broski

>>4003844

>I am genuinely worried, and perhaps even saddened that the promises made will never come to fruition.

They will not, and you should be glad that they do not. I would recommend playing the game Deus Ex: Human Revolution, for a look at how a society that included invasive cybernetic technology would likely end up, if such a scenario was to really occur.

Transhumanism deserves to be buried and forgotten about. It has never produced anything other than delusion, because delusion is its' very fabric.

>>4003856

It wasn't intended as trolling. I meant every word.

>>4003871
really? so you unironically typed out 'pre-quantum Cartesian materialists' and still thought your opinion was worth a damn?

fat chance, nerd.

>>4003728
>>4003708
Yeah.. mobile phones had rapidly shrunk from a huge brick to fairly small things, and you could voice command computers in a simple fashion such as yes, no, or stating a number to select from a menu.

Of course both developments were going to continue along unless replaced by something radically new.

So I repeat, very strange and banal credit. It's just obvious. Here's my prediction: soon we'll have chat bots that consistently defeat the Turing test. They'll come in many flavors and personalities and have a shit ton of uses.

(Some specifics just for the fun of it: Several frameworks will be standardized so that people can share personality traits and features with the click of a button. They'll also be able to creatively come up with stories thanks to statistical data of millions of stories. Even farther down the line, there's no market for human fiction unless it has value beyond entertainment.)

>>4003877

Yes, and my faith in my own opinions is really going to be completely invalidated by the condescension of some random on the Internet.

>>4003887
i have an image in my head of a future where a dirty looking neckbeard tries to convince androids on the street that they are not conscious beings.

surely asimov has written something like this?

>>4003911

He probably has. That doesn't mean it's going to happen.

>>4003916
any particular reason for thinking so?

>>4003927

Capitalism, ironically enough. If the vaunted singularity never gets here, Capitalism will be the main thing that you can blame for that.

Before you accuse me of being disingenuous, here, understand that I am someone with direct, personal experience of non-Capitalist economic models. I've pirated software in many different forms since the commodore 64. I've also spent time living in a society that was predominantly run by hippies, as well as having ten years with the open source software community. I first started using the Internet back in 1994, before the money arrived here, and I remember how much more quickly things moved forward back then, and how much more robust the net as a whole was.

In other words, my perspective that Capitalism as an economic paradigm, and/or what Peter Joseph called the monetary market system, drives technological progress to a near standstill, is only held because I have direct experience of that occurring; and of the opposite occurring when other systems are used.

>>4003844
As somebody who is heavily involved in technology, we have made progress.

The progress is just not the kind you can really use. Microprocessors are at the point where, if we make them faster, they'd run so insanely hot that it's not worth it.

2045 seems a bit close, but I could see computers capable of simulating a brain (and procedures for uploading yours to one) by ~2075 or so. Maybe slightly longer.

We still don't know if the brain can be run on a non-quantumm Turing machine, so figuring that out will be a big step.

>>4003937
Capitalism can drive technology as well, though.

I do think that, if the singularity happens, it will happen due to Free software. But I think that Capitalism will help us get there.

>>4003942

How, exactly? Capitalism as an ideology...and again, really even money itself...are systems which were designed for the express purpose of regulating scarcity. Because Capitalism needs scarcity in order to continue at all, where there is no scarcity, it creates it.

In the case of technological development, the primary way that it has done that, is with the creation of the morally and rationally illegitimate concept known as intellectual property.

The reason why people insist on claiming that the world would not be a radically better place if copyright did not exist, is because said difference is that fundamental, that most of us cannot comprehend it. Like I said earlier, I've traded files for most of my life, and have otherwise tried to live in defiance of copyright law, which I truthfully view as a moral imperative...but even I can't really get my head around it.

We would live in a scenario where literally *any* two ideas could be potentially cross-pollinated with each other, and the results of said cross-pollination could then be actually used.

>>4003937
>the monetary market system, drives technological progress to a near standstill
These people exist. They walk among us. They vote.

>>4003954

Instead of reacting purely on the basis of blind emotion, try reading the entirety of my post. I'm guessing you won't be willing to do that, however, because that would require broad mindedness; and your initial post does not give me confidence that you possess large quantities of that.

>>4003963
Not laughing at deranged clowns is what makes the clouds move.

Accept it or you're just not broad-minded.

>>4003963
some vague claims that the internet 'progressed more rapidly' before 'money got here'

really stupid stuff, I'm sorry I read it twice.

>>4003950
Copyright also helps progress, though.


Positive reinforcement is the best motivating factor for an action, followed by negative reinforcement. Capitalism employs both, which most other systems do not do.

Let's say you're a slacker in a purely communist society. You are punished for not helping "the people," possibly by being sent to a gulag or murdered. However, if you were to work, and work harder then others, you don't get anything in return except your safety.

Capitalism is different. If you are a slacker, you may be punished with lack of property or even possibly food. But, if you do work - And your work has a larger impact then the work of other people - You can buy nice things. Positive and negative reinforcement combine.

Copyright should, theoretically, keep this in place. If you invent something, you get positively reinforced, because you get money when people buy it. If copyright didn't exist, there would be no positive reinforcement.

Copyright as it is now is horrible, though. It allows a company to benefit positively from one work entirely too long. Ideally, copyright would last 25-30 years, before becoming completely public domain.

Even with copyright, though, capitalism helps technological process. It's very simple to see that creating new technologies people want to buy will positively effect the inventor. Look at Apple, Microsoft, Intel, NVIDIA, or Texas Instruments. These companies then strive to make more technology, so they can make more money, so their executives can buy more stuff.

Communism or other monetary systems may be better for progress in very specific situations, but I feel Capitalism will have the best long-term result for technological development in most cases.

Also, you said "Open Source Software community" in your last post. That's not the proper term - You should use "Free Software."

Learn2/g/

>>4003974
Rivers are what makes the sea levels drop.

>>4003977
>Also, you said "Open Source Software community" in your last post. That's not the proper term - You should use "Free Software."

According to some. There are other opinions. Stallman is a cult leader, as far as I am concerned; and you've just provided a demonstration of how that is the case.

>>4003986
I'm not a cultist. I do, however, think "open source" doesn't really cover the philosophy.

Microsoft could release the sourcecode to Windows tomorrow, but if the license prevents the code from being used, it's useless. "Free Software" is more descriptive and accurate.

Copyright is a great invention that advances civilization in the sum of things. However, using the concept of copyright to punish someone for *consuming* rather than making profit off copyrighted material is stupid. If people have a way of copying your work for their own amusement then you need to advance or change your model if you want to make more money. You don't own people's money before they've traded it to you.

Disclaimer: I'm not /lit/ affiliated. I don't want casual visitors to think /lit/ users are capable of nuance.

>>3993980
>What's the point in giving man superhuman bodily abilities without first improving him morally?
The point is that the former might be a cathalyst for the latter. Specially when morals don't seem to evolve through time while technology does.

>>3996249
Hateful remark indeed. Insensitive to potatoes.

becausepotato.jpeg

>>4004008
>Microsoft could release the sourcecode to Windows tomorrow, but if the license prevents the code from being used, it's useless. "Free Software" is more descriptive and accurate.

a} Using the term "Free software," creates confusion about monetary price, when Stallman has written that price is not what he is referring to. Most people are not going to know that, however.

b} Creating a custom vocabulary for a particular subculture or group, or redefining pre-existing words within a group, is a process that was described by Robert Jay Lifton in a book called, "Thought Reform and the Psychology of Totalism," which was a thesis that Lifton wrote after observing the treatment of American POWs by the Communist Chinese in the 1950s. The term for this that Lifton used, was "loading of the language," and it is not only engaged in for deception, but also to create a sense of exclusivity and elitism.

Aside from that, Richard Stallman is a narcissistic megalomaniac. He has consistently attempted to negate the importance of the Linux kernel, in order to promote what he refers to as, "the GNU system," and has also tried to create a false perception in the minds of those who do not know better, that the entire practice of source code availability did not exist before him. He has also tried to create the equally false perception that no other source-available UNIX toolchain exists outside of the GNU project, when in reality, GCC is the only element which is truly irreplaceable at this point. The BSD distributions have their own versions of numerous elements of the POSIX userland.

Please engage in some of your own research, in terms of both UNIX's history specifically, and that of computing more generally, before you merely accept Stallman's version of things. As mentioned, I view him as being very similar, in some respects, to Scientology's Lefayette Ronald Hubbard. He has not done as much practical harm, no; but in truth, he is a very similar personality.

>>4001450
>Therefore it could be sa
what

I can feel myself evolving so hard right now. Thanks RoboJesus!

>>4003911
i have an image in my head of a future where a dirty looking neckbeard masturbating to a non-existent gizmos and gadgets all the cybersex he's gonna get

>>4003938
>As somebody who is heavily involved in technology
hurrrrrrrrrrr look at muh Dunning-Kruger!!!! Ima an expert!!

>>4003817
>Cybernetic immortality – fantasy or scientific problem? I can answer that right away.
sure thing, grandpa, you got this

>important scientists such as [...] Kurzweil
my sides have reached the singularity
some quality intellectual at work here, did you suck putins cock for that job, grandpa?

anyway, shut up old man, you're still gonna die, take it like a man

>>4003950
Ever heard about a place called Silicon Valley? It has been THE place to bee since the 70s, like it or not. And the most wealth created there has not been about buying and selling physical stuff for money, but buying and selling software code for money.

>>4003712
>The Universe Wakes Up
Reminds me of Charles Fourier (1772-1837).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Fourier

>Fourier is best remembered for his writings on a new world order based on unity of action and harmonious collaboration. He is also known for certain Utopian pronouncements, such as that the seas would lose their salinity and turn to lemonade, and a coincidental view of climate change, that the North Pole would be milder than the Mediterranean in a future phase of Perfect Harmony.

I've actually read Fourier and I doubt that Kurzweil is more amusing.

>>4003938
>As somebody who is heavily involved in technology,
>Microprocessors are at the point where, if we make them faster, they'd run so insanely hot that it's not worth it.

http://www.technologyreview.com/view/428235/intel-reveals-neuromorphic-chip-design/

>>4003353
It is not fucking happening and never will. The only reason that we have used wooden legs since...forever it's because the alternative is worse. Not to go super saiyan.

And these projects of The Cyborg Foundation is fucking kiddie fare:

>SPEEDBORG

>Internal radar that allows you to perceive the exact speed of movements in front of you via vibrations. First prototypes were attached to the hand (2007-2009) followed by others attached to the earlobes.

So basically it's a speeding radar with a vibrator?

I'm reluctant to admit that the microphone (or Eyeborg if you must be pedestrian about it) is the least worst project. But all it takes to put it out of business is a good yank. Now try to do the same thing with a pacemaker.

And it is also interesting that Harbisson looks like he's harassing people while making "a portrait" of them. And the *webcam* on a *snake stand* is fucking bargain bin futurism. Just a little twist and Harbisson is making a portrait of his own ass. Why not try to make a "snake" that can move on its own? Or why not put *two* cameras in a frame of glasses? Not only do you get a stereo effect, but you also don't look like Bibbedeboop the Fucking One-Antennaed Martian.

Oh, I suppose that it was the reason from the very beginning. I am sorry.

So unless there's implants that doesn't look like the fucking circus arrived (think Deus Ex and the intrusive cyborg implants of Hermann and Navarre vs the far cooler nanotech of the Dentons) and that a "reading" is as simple as just a glance - I am not impressed.

And for your reading pleasure:
http://www.electricsheepcomix.com/almostguy

>>4004954
>microphone
Sorry, I meant the bioouuuiiiooouuuuuiiooouuu earphones on mono. Because stereo is so crappy.

>>4004954
>The only reason that we have used wooden legs since...forever it's because the alternative is worse.

huh? Prosthetics are continuously improving.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_qUPnnROxvY

>>4004964
Yeah, and there's these paralympics that have prosthetic legs that are superior to normal legs while running.

On a track.

Now, just name one prosthetic leg that is as good as a normal leg, or do you really think that the killer Oscar Pistorius would be able to run in the woods or last even a round in the ring?

>>4004969
What on earth do the woods or boxing rings have to do with anything?

>>4004969
>Oscar Pistorius would be able to run in the woods or last even a round in the ring?
Sure. He'd be wearing pic related instead of his blades.

The point is "prosthetics are continuously improving." so your demand for something now is silly. You should be looking at the research papers and funding from Darpa, touchbionics, and other companies to see where we are expected to be in ten years.

>>4004969
Tell you what, why don't you go a round in the ring with the bloke in >>4004964 ?
No gloves.
He'd cave your head in. Point being, cherry-picking situations where certain prosthetics still aren't as useful as real limbs doesn't mean they're not improving.

>>4004971
So you don't grasp the difference between a set stage and the unpredictable, multifaceted reality? Because running fast on super saiyan prosthetics is just as impressive someone born without arms and legs but that can swim super fast by wiggling in a special suit with lots of fins on.

Of course it's impressive in it's own way and for the handicapped it is probably better to be able to run on a track or swim in a pool than being at home and slowly rot away.

But unless the Navy SEALs subjects themselves to drastic surgical procedures, it's all glorified wheelchairs and crutches.

>>4004977
Are you retarded? A boxing ring is a set stage. Why would you use that as an example of something that isn't a set stage?
Holy shit you're an idiot.

>someone born without arms and legs but that can swim super fast by wiggling in a special suit with lots of fins on.
That would be pretty impressive and also awesome.

>>4004974
In the woods as in off the paths? In the woods as in on cliffs and over logs? Because the balls off the feet are a prerequisite for being sure-footed. No feet - no real walking.

>>4004976
I am not cherry picking. I am just pointing out that because it is possible to set the stage for a handicapped so that he can get his 15 mins. That is not the same thing as the prostetics are proof of singularity or whatever. There is still not a leg prosthetic with the same properties as a real leg. A prosthetic that allows you to switch between various task in a heartbeat.

Consider this. A bunch of gents was playing horse polo on a hot day. The ball accidentally in a pond, so they dismounted and continued the game there. And thus was water polo born. Now if a bunch of invalids with their special horseback prosthetes wanted to do the same thing, they probably had to switch prosthetics.

And the "terminator" arm prosthetic with no gloves? Now, how long time woudl it take for me to tear it apart? It's designed for tying shoes, you know.

>>4004988
This is an impression of you
>HNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNG

>>4004978
A boxing ring is a set stage, true. But "Blade Runner's" super sayian running prosthetics will make him even less sure-footed (moarliek even moar shit-footed, amirite?) than regular prosthetics. He could as well spare everyone the indignity of enduring his shitty footwork and have legs where the feet are just buckets of cement. At least the end would be quicker.

The point is that it is actually possible to not make an ass of yourself on the sprinting track and then not make an ass of yourself in the boxing ring - wihtout even having to change shoes!

>>4004996
So can the transhumanist stop jizzpotting over prosthetics? Unless the military, police or the criminals starts to replace arms and legs, because it will improve their work, I am not impressed.

>>4004978

I think you missed the point of his use of the boxing ring as an example. A boxing ring is a set stage, but boxing is anything but predictable or linear, which was his point; footwork in a boxing match is way more variable than running on a track, just as running through a forest and having to deal with uneven terrain is more variable than running on a track.

Not that I agree or disagree with who you're responding to, just explaining his use of a boxing ring as an example. It would have been better to use boxing in a boxing ring specifically as an example to avoid misinterpretation, but whatever.

>>4005006
And it doesn't even have to be boxing. Imagine kickboxing/thaiboxing, wrestling, MMA etc...

>>4005006
I completely understood what he was trying to say, but I don't think it's a valid point and I have no opinion on the cyborg singularity or any of that sort of thing, I just started posting to point out he's an idiot so I don't care to explain why it's invalid.
Of all the infinite possible examples of things that aren't a "set stage" why would you pick a boxing ring? That's just moronic beyond belief.

>>4005014
I'd love to see him try kickboxing against a trained kickboxer who has a big piece of sharp metal for a foot. That would be even more retarded than boxing him.

>>4005016

Have you ever boxed? Unless you're seriously well trained or professional, boxing is a pretty chaotic experience even with training. You're constantly jerking, leaning, shifting your weight and your feet, swinging and getting swung at.

It's actually a pretty good example to use, because boxing (or fighting in general) is heavily loaded with all kinds of variables, all sorts of movement, and what have you.

It's not nearly as orderly and straightforward as running laps around a track, which is really the point. If anything, I'd say that combative sports are probably the least orderly, and are a fairly good example of what he was trying to convey. This is most especially true because of the human element in the form of your opponent, who you have no meaningful control over.

>>4005004
>So can the transhumanist stop jizzpotting over prosthetics?
No. You seem to be forgetting the crucial thing; that this is an area that we are seeing constant progress in, and the technology is benefiting humanity.

Take a look at the prosthetic designs from Chalmers University of Technology in Sweden. The guy who was posted with his arm uses electromyography signals from voluntarily contracted muscles within his stump to control the movement of the artificial limb. The guys in Sweden are developing a limb that can be controlled by direct neural feedback. In their press release: "Osseointegration in combination with neural electrodes that will translate thought into movement."

Then take a look at a least a hundred other development facilities to see incredible development. Just because technology is incredibly primitive now doesn't mean anything.

>>4005022
Okay, and when combative sports are a regular and important part of life for the majority of the world, that still would be irrelevant to the fact that prosthetics are improving and therefore irrelevant to the conversation.
Even then you'd have to rewire reality so most basic prosthesis couldn't be used as a club to break your bones as they can currently.
Do you not think before you post?

>>4005018
This. I would much sooner kickbox against a regular guy, than someone with a chuck of titanium for a foot.

>>4005030

>Do you not think before you post?

Do you? I'm not the person you're arguing with you dumbshit, I'm pointing out why he used boxing as a contrast to running on a track of an example as to how or why prostheses might be lacking. I even pointed out in my original post that I didn't agree with him and was elaborating on his example because you clearly did not understand what he was getting at, despite the fact that anyone with two braincells to rub together would easily conflate the contrast of a boxing ring to a running track to be a contrast of boxing to running.

You are so far beyond stupid and incapable of even reading clear context clues that I'm not sure how you understand concepts like operating a computer, breathing, or ambulation.

How do have you not inadvertently drowned yourself trying to bathe yet?

>>4005018
The thing is that the prosthetic can't be too sturdy or heavy, because then it would be like the proverbial buckets of cement. So the MMA could as well end up in the prosthetics being tied up in ribbons or totally dismantled.

>>4005025
And still no augmentations for Adam Jensen. Getting there doesn't count...

>>4005037
>So the MMA could as well end up in the prosthetics being tied up in ribbons or totally dismantled.
There is medical clearance for MMA (and most other contact sports) that bans people from competing with prosthetics because of their advantage. It counts as a weapon. Though there are many fighters with prosthetics wanting to fight. Like this guy:

http://www.mixedmartialarts.com/news/174484/MMA-fighter-with-prosthetic-leg-seeks-opponents/

>>4005036
You are arguing with me, note how you're getting angry and calling me names.

Now, why the fuck would he be wearing a prosthetic, that's specially designed for running in a straight line very fast, in a boxing ring? Why pick a boxing ring rather than just a fight? Fights happen far more often in real life. Again, he'd just kick chunks of flesh off you. The boxing ring is cherry picking a situation where that one specific augmentation is inappropriate. It's dumb.

>>4005032
Really? If you're allowed to kick to the leg (but not the joints) it's a relative simple matter of attacking the other leg until it's too tender for kicking with the other leg. And if the handicapped prefers to kick with the prosthetics more often than any other kind of attack, it's fairly easy to predict.

>>4005044
>it's a relative simple matter of attacking the other leg until it's too tender for kicking with the other leg.
...and while you're using your normal legs to attack his normal leg, he uses his big metal leg to kick yours. Blow for blow, you're fucked.
>it's fairly easy to predict
That's great if you have some way of blocking his blows, which you don't.

>>4005043
I can run with the legs I was born with.
I can fight with the legs I was born with.
I can swim with the legs I was born with.
I can climb with the legs I was born with.
I can horseback ride with the legs I was born with.

>>3999605
What about this boilerplate?
http://www.johannorberg.net/?page=displayblog&month=10&year=2012
He fucking doesn't even mention Thomas Metzinger.

>>4005054
>I can run with the legs I was born with.
>I can fight with the legs I was born with.
>I can swim with the legs I was born with.
>I can climb with the legs I was born with.
>I can horseback ride with the legs I was born with.

You can tuck your legs beneath a computer desk while you do none of those things.

>>4005054
>implying ubermensch transhumans aren't gonna run around with a 300lb backpacks full of spare parts
do u even the future?

>>4005054
None of those things mean prosthetics aren't improving.

>>4005046
So if every pore of his body screams "IMMAGONNAKICKYOUWITHMAHMETALLEG" I can't dodge it? Also, there's a big difference between shin kicks (hold feet straight) and push kick (kick with the sole of your foot). If you can't move your foot, your kicking will suffer.

There's also the case of F=ma. Plebs focus on m. Pros consider a. Because if you can't optimize a, it's gonna be drunkard barfight.

>>4005064
>improving
keep hiding behind ambiguity
"two" changing to "three" doesn't mean it's near "three billion" any time soon

>>4005064
And the transhumanists are still retards for getting their undies in a bundle over prosthetics that are either highly specialized or just glorifided wooden legs.

>>4005069
stop ruining my gizmo-consumerist we dreams!

>>4005065
Oh for the love of god. Stop imagining hypothetical situations where you can beat up a cripple.

>>4005069
stop ruining my gizmo-consumerist wet dreams!

>>4005069
But they're not. They're looking at the ones designed for ten years from now that are controlled via osseointegrated neural implants, with more hydraulic strength than regular skeletal muscle.

>>4005073
isn't that all transhumanists ever do? masturbate over ad-hoc hypotheticals that coincidentaly support their preconceived biases and delusions while congratulating and high-fiving each other over how loyal true believers they are?

>>4005068
>"two" changing to "three" doesn't mean it's near "three billion" any time soon
Maybe, but does mean he's setting world records using prosthetics he could use to kick your shins off. That's three hundred, at least.

>>4005077
>They're looking at the ones designed for ten years from
key to understanding transhumanists

>>4005079
I have no idea, I'm not a transhumanist.

>>4005060
Still not the same thing as being able to switch between activites in a hearbeat. Of course leather riding boots are highly specialized footwear that one shouldn't even do stable work in. (Rubber riding boots are another issue.) And the really good riding boots are often very hard to put on, take off and uncomfy to walk in. But if we assume that something extraordinary happens and the changing of footwear must be postponed, you can still wear your boots for some time.

Now, let's assume that something extraordinary happens and everyone must leave the stadium and there's no time to change the legs. What are the paralympics with their "blades" going to do? Probably walk with crutches.

>>4005083
>implying you have to christard to understand christianity
yeah, nope

>>4005084
>Now, let's assume that something extraordinary happens and everyone must leave the stadium and there's no time to change the legs. What are the paralympics with their "blades" going to do? Probably walk with crutches.

Run out of there faster than everyone else.

>>4005083
>I'm not a transhumanist
I am disappointed, Anon.

>>4005086
>Being contradictory for the sake of it
Mmkay.
>>4005084
>What are the paralympics with their "blades" going to do?
I imagine they'd keep their blade on and be out of the building first, because their blades are perfectly capable of running on concrete and tarmac. You know, that stuff that covers pretty much the entire human world? Unlike boxing rings.

>>4005073
I would take no pride in beating up a cripple. I am just poking holes in the idea that prosthetics are improving (2 < 3 "but" 3 != 3 000 000 000) is proof that something imminent is happening or whatever. Because I see to the totality of the situation. (Yes, a prosthetic may be made of material sturdier than flesh and bone, but it suffers in a lot of other aspects, e.g. every other aspect.) Prosthetics are worse than the original but better than nothing at all.

>>4005081
Reality check! Please make a drawing of how he possibly could use these prosthetics for kicking. Because his footing is even worser than a horse's.

>>4005094
>>Being contradictory for the sake of it
what the fuck are you even trying to say? learn english

>>4005097
>I am just poking holes in the idea that prosthetics are improving (2 < 3 "but" 3 != 3 000 000 000) is proof that something imminent is happening or whatever.
No one is saying that 3 = 3 million. Just that 2 < 3. You're bringing it in as a straw man.

>Please make a drawing of how he possibly could use these prosthetics for kicking.
Burden of proof is on you to show he can't. Make a drawing of how he can't kick. Have fun.

>>4005091
Running out to a muddy field. Enjoy the footing. Hell, even a parking lot with some gravel on would spell annoyance.

And of course riding boots are pretty bad to wear on muddy fields, because the soles are so flat. But if you have to stand there for a few hours, it is better than being barefoot.

Disregarding the social acceptability, it is better to be a normal person and wear a pair of Königs Petrie for everyday occasion than being an invalid with best prostetics in the world.

>>4005103
Oh shit, we must have forgotten about all those Olympic stadiums built in the middle of fields.

>>4005097
>is proof that something imminent is happening or whatever
But it is happening, Anon.

Right now there is a monkey sat in a lab in Brazil, as a result of collaboration from multiple countries, with an array of microwires fed directly into it's brain. Not only does it have full control over prosthetic limbs via thought, it can navigate a virtual world by thought, and feel sensation from touching virtual objects.

Next year this is being tried on a human. The technology IS advancing.

>>4005102
3 <<<<<<<<< 3 000 000 000
Nothing to be impressed over.

Simple. He has no ankles. Ankles are important for kicking. See this man. He is using the ankles in a very intricate way.

>>4005102
>No one is saying that 3 = 3 million. Just that 2 < 3. You're bringing it in as a straw man.
>3 = 3 million
This is exactly what they are implying, if not, why the fuck would anyone even bring prosthetics up in the first place?

>>4005107
oh shit, cripples live and breed on stadiums their whole fucking lives, just like cattle

moron

>>4005112
He might struggle to do a special kung-fu move like that but kicking is just moving your leg forward. If he can walk, he can kick.

>>4005113
If you can't conceive of a situation where someone can bring up prosthetics without simultaneously trying to equate three with three million then I don't see the point in speaking to you any further.

>>4005107
I also mentioned a parking lot with gravel on. Thing is that if you wear general-purpose footwear, such as Palladium boots, you can go from the office, on the sidewalk, over a muddy field without thinking so much about it.

Now please do the same thing while changing footwear from Crocs to Playboys to Hunters. Quite a hassle, eh?

>>4005108
Impressive in its own right. But I prefer to be much more vary about german shepherds, rottweilers and pitbulls than cyber-monkeys.

And does the monkey demand constant medical attention or not?

>>4005114
Or they might live and breed in cities with pavement and tarmac and sidewalks their whole fucking lives, just like people.

You fat-handed twat.

>>4005121
>And does the monkey demand constant medical attention or not?
It does at the moment. The microwires have been 'attached' to nearly 3,000 neurons, and protrude externally for ease. When tried on a human, they will be embedded under the skin to act as a 'nervous system' that control a corresponding hydraulic muscles and feeds sensation back up to the brain.

The most exciting part is the artificial tactile feedback; the fact that it is now possible to experience the sensation of touching a virtual object.

>>4005118
See the left foot in >>4005112 ? It is pointing backwards. The kick started by pointing the supporting foot backwards. This is to improve the swing. Of course you can perform the same kick with the supporting foot pointing fowards, but it won't be the same.

And we can all agree that Adam Jensen's arms are superior to normal arms, no? The thing is that prosthetics are lacking in so many departments that they STILL are nothing but glorified peg legs, hooks and ear horns. Better than nothing but still not better than the original organs. And of course every improvement is something to laud. But it is still the result of hard and piecemeal work. Not fancy dreams.

So if the transhumanists want proof of imminence, please spare us the indignity of potjizz made on paralympian peglegs.

>>4005127
Still not the same things. Because you've still got to disprove that wearing dressage riding boots for every occasion is equal to or worse than wearing double leg prosthetics.

>>4005133
So we're getting there, slowly...?

>>4005133
>the fact that it is now possible to experience the sensation of touching a virtual object.

To elaborate on this: The monkey had it's arm chopped off and an array of microwires embedded in it's motor cortex. Before they gave it a prosthetic arm to play with, they plugged the monkey in to a simulation of an arm to control and calibrate. The monkey could not only move the virtual arm around and pick up virtual objects; the neuroscientists could feedback glial electrical signals that fired the synapses of the motor neurons and let the monkey actually feel the virtual objects it was holding.

>>3996484
>pure logic
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_bIoeBpSeU4
>edge of the mat
>jiggyjiggy

>>4005144
oh shit, nigga.

>>4005148
>Matrix.
That is a long way off.

With the tech we have have now, you could only combine the motor neuron microwires and the retinal implants. You would have someone in a dark room with a blurry glowing cube made of 500 dots of light, and the sensation of being able to touch it.

Full blown virtual reality (something like driving a car) is very, very far away, and would need the entire GDP of a few countries to even begin thinking about.

Pic related is a microscopic view of one one of the many arrays they would stick in your head. Would you really want a load of those just to be able to experience VR? Controlling a prosthetic limb is one thing, but vanity surgery is different -- especially in our lifetimes anyway.

The truly vital question is: have y'all prayed to lord kurzewil today? If not for the clapping and back-patting, the Future would sure be arrested forever.

>>4005164
The question is what have Kurzweil done today?

>>4005167
same as yesterday

1. breakfast
2. 50 placebo supplement pills
3. nap
4. cashing in daily $50k google check
5. 20 minutes of licking larry page's ass
6. quick check if humanity is still on the way to robojesus
7. supper with 50 supplement pills
8. crying about his ded dad SOOO SAD
9. bed

>>4005167
>The question is what have Kurzweil done today?

Kurzweil is working on cybernetic learning matrices for Google at the moment. He has his own program like Siri, and is designing a series of algorithms to create a system that can learn and self-develop from feedback and environmental stimulation.

>>4005154
>Would you really want a load of those just to be able to experience VR?

If I was the first human to experiences it? Yes. I'd risk my eyes to be the first to see in VR.

>>4005172
>Kurzweil is working on cybernetic learning matrices for Google at the moment.
yeah, he's actually given concrete work to do @google rather than just being an overpaid motivational speaker for silly valley egotistical libtards
keep telling yourself that

>>4005176
libertardians* of course

>>4005176
>keep telling yourself that
I'm only going by the outline of his cybernetic learning program that Google announced.

>This thread again.
lel

Another day,
another transhumanist thread,
another time that /lit/s robopreacher gets a spanking and reduced to tears again.

>>4005179
well, yeah, it would be a shitty PR for them both if they admitted he's just an overpaid motivational speaker for the saucer-eyed tech geeks coding updates for google maps.

Though, singularity is all about faith in it, so he's still doing robogods work.

>>4005184
lel

another thread that robot cultists high-five each other in a circle jerk without even attempting at forming counter-arguments

it's all about clapping, folks!

>>4005179
Yeah, as well as heading a team of scientists and technicians for his learning algorithm, he also syphons off google funds for the Singularity University.

>>4005170
10. indulging in the guilty pleasure of reading old, paper-back sci-fi novels where it's good old-fashioned adventures IN SPACE!

>>4005172
>Siri
Nicked the name from a porn star? Poor woman, what did she do to him?

>>4005197
>Singularity
What is it with that word that when it doesn't make me think of black holes (almost never), it makes me think of nuclear weapons?

>>4005188
>counter-arguments
to what? You have no valid argument to counter.

This thread is just a rational discussion of transhumanism with you sat in the middle screaming about Kurzweil being a greedy jew that's trying to control the world with robojesus.

>>4005200
This should put you at ease.

http://singularityu.org/overview/

>>4005202
b-b-but I'm OP

and I still see no arguments for your pet religion

>>4005208
"Transhumanism is a class of philosophies of life that seek the continuation and acceleration of the evolution of intelligent life beyond its current form and human limitations by means of science and technology, guided by life-promoting principles and values.

Transhumanism takes a multidisciplinary approach in analyzing the dynamic interplay between humanity and the acceleration of technology. In this sphere, much of the focus and attention is on the present technologies, such as biotechnology and information technology, and future technologies, such as molecular nanotechnology and artificial general intelligence. Transhumanism seeks the ethical use of these and other speculative technologies."

>>4005212
>evolution of intelligent life beyond its current
what the fuck does it even mean? holy shit muh fuzzy ambiguity

>Transhumanism takes a multidisciplinary approach
for someone to be multidisciplinarian, one has actually be a specialist in at least two of them. Transhumanists are basement nerds with ego problems, no credentials, and ESPECIALLY no interdisciplinarian acumen. You are so laughable, you are not even ACKNOWLEDGED to exist by consensus scientific community. You are role-playing.

> acceleration of technology
meaningless buzzwords, both "technology" and "acceleration" of technology

>much of the focus and attention is on the present technologies
yep, nerds at their basement HQ picking and choosing facts and developments from actual scientists doing actual research that fit their presupposed narrative

>Transhumanism seeks the ethical use of these and other speculative technologies
you don't do shit, as neither there are actual existing technologies to be discussed nor your club has any authority to be leading the discours. Leave this shit to the adults.

>>4005212
So the reason that trains and incecticides was abused in the Holocaust is that humanism failed?

Makes sense, actually.

>>4005229
>what the fuck does it even mean? holy shit muh fuzzy ambiguity
If you don't understand words, you would try consulting a dictionary.

>for someone to be multidisciplinarian, one has actually be a specialist in at least two of them.
Again, comprehension fail. "Transhumanism" isn't a person.

>meaningless buzzwords, both "technology" and "acceleration" of technology
Someone already schooled you one this. Scroll up the thread to the pizza argument you lost.

>yep, nerds at their basement HQ picking and choosing facts and developments from actual scientists doing actual research that fit their presupposed narrative
Not realising that the quote you are raging against came from the Ph.D neuroscientist Anders Sandberg and the Ph.D neuroscientist Holger Wagner.

>neither there are actual existing technologies to be discussed nor your club has any authority
Reality would like a word.

http://www.wtec.org/ConvergingTechnologies/Report/welcome.htm
>Converging Technologies, a 2002 report exploring the potential for synergy among nano-, bio-, info- and cogno-technologies, has become a landmark in near-future technological speculation.


"...the formation of knowledge and the increase of power regularly reinforce each other..."

- Michel Foucault, Discipline and Punish


"It really is of importance, what men do, but also what manner of men are that do it. Among the works of man... the first importance surely is man himself."

- John Stuart Mill, On Liberty


"Let us reply to ambition itself that it is she that gives us a taste for solitude."

- Montaigne

>>4005269
knowing a label of a thing doesn't mean you know shit about it, you retard

keep roleplaying being smart

someone already schooled you to take your denning-kruger to your basement and don't come out

>>4005269
>Anders Sandberg a
self-declared robot cultist cheering and clapping for robot cult

yeah, you totally convinced me

you tards have no shame

>>4005042
>Paulson, who shaves his head and once considered fighting under the nickname "Pirate" because of the peg leg, walks with a slight limp. He said he fights "one-sided" because he can't push off his left leg as well as his right leg, in part because of no feeling in the foot.
Not unbeatable, but whith a severe disadvantage.

>>4005332
>>4005334
Oh Jesus, you're still here running your mouth; and after the beating you got too.

Here. This is you - the Black Knight:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=zKhEw7nD9C4#t=01m24s

>>4005427
you have to repeat it at least 50 times for it to magically become true, hasn't your circlejerk cult thought you that?

you still have 20 times to go. Go on kiddie, don't disappoint robojebus. See you in the next thread, I miss your zero content one-liners already.