/sci/ - Science & Math

Any good theories about what humans will be like int he future?

>>11510868
That meme sucks ass. Here's a better version of it.

How would you design a drug that causes effects similar to a vacation?

I.E. clears the mind allowing for more work to be done. I'm thinking of the Lao Tzu quote where a bowl is most useful when its empty.

>>10502177
>Ai becomes meaningless at this point.
Wrong. Even with gene editing, it is still limited compared to what AI could eventually do. Your brain only fires at 200 Hertz, and has a limited amount of hardware.

https://intelligence.org/files/AIPosNegFactor.pdf

Building a 747 from scratch is not easy. But is it easier to:
• Start with the existing design of a biological bird,
• and incrementally modify the design through a series of successive stages,
• each stage independently viable,
• such that the endpoint is a bird scaled up to the size of a 747,
• which actually flies,
• as fast as a 747,
• and then carry out this series of transformations on an actual living bird,
• without killing the bird or making it extremely uncomfortable?
I’m not saying it could never, ever be done. I’m saying that it would be easier to build
the 747, and then have the 747, metaphorically speaking, upgrade the bird. “Let’s just
scale up an existing bird to the size of a 747” is not a clever strategy that avoids dealing
with the intimidating theoretical mysteries of aerodynamics. Perhaps, in the beginning,
all you know about flight is that a bird has the mysterious essence of flight, and the
materials with which you must build a 747 are just lying there on the ground. But you
cannot sculpt the mysterious essence of flight, even as it already resides in the bird, until
flight has ceased to be a mysterious essence unto you.
The above argument is directed at a deliberately extreme case. The general point is
that we do not have total freedom to pick a path that sounds nice and reassuring, or
that would make a good story as a science fiction novel. We are constrained by which
technologies are likely to precede others.

>>10466592
Imagine having a meat brain with neurons that only fire at 200 Hertz

>>10423495
Dude immortality by 2050

>>10310076
Fuck no.

https://intelligence.org/files/AIPosNegFactor.pdf

Building a 747 from scratch is not easy. But is it easier to:
• Start with the existing design of a biological bird,
• and incrementally modify the design through a series of successive stages,
• each stage independently viable,
• such that the endpoint is a bird scaled up to the size of a 747,
• which actually flies,
• as fast as a 747,
• and then carry out this series of transformations on an actual living bird,
• without killing the bird or making it extremely uncomfortable?
I’m not saying it could never, ever be done. I’m saying that it would be easier to build
the 747, and then have the 747, metaphorically speaking, upgrade the bird. “Let’s just
scale up an existing bird to the size of a 747” is not a clever strategy that avoids dealing
with the intimidating theoretical mysteries of aerodynamics. Perhaps, in the beginning,
all you know about flight is that a bird has the mysterious essence of flight, and the
materials with which you must build a 747 are just lying there on the ground. But you
cannot sculpt the mysterious essence of flight, even as it already resides in the bird, until
flight has ceased to be a mysterious essence unto you.
The above argument is directed at a deliberately extreme case. The general point is
that we do not have total freedom to pick a path that sounds nice and reassuring, or
that would make a good story as a science fiction novel. We are constrained by which
technologies are likely to precede others.

>>9416642
This.
>biology
>only relevant to biology and sub disciplines

>computing
>relevant to pretty much every field

Scoop some up in a transparent container and let it sit for a few days.
See if any sediment settles out of it or if it's something dissolved into solution.