/sci/ - Science & Math

>>9284035

For objective, quantifiable information, it's useful.

For subjective, opinion-based info (like politics and entertainment) it's cancer.

>>8346530

That's okay...you're young and stupid, and take the huge leaps forward in technology in the last couple of decades for granted. You think the internet and flat screens and computers you could put in your pocket and streaming shows and games and music, etc, were always there and that garbage like vinyl and video tapes practical special effects and 2D animation in movies and sending humans into space instead of badass robot probes were something we voluntarily put aside and something worth missing, like all the nostalgic hipster bullshit out there these days.

Being alive a while might give you some perspective.

>>8238022
>What's the future of evolution? Cybernetics or Genetic augmentation?
>or

cybernetic --> cybernetic/genetic --> cybernetic nanotech

We're already in the cybernetic stage (pacemakers, artificial limbs, cochlear implants, etc), moving into the cybernetic/genetic stage, thanks to breakthroughs like CRISPR.

Cybernetic nanotech will integrate and improve upon nature. One concept: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Respirocyte

I don't rule out mind uploading as the ultimate solution to augmentation, and no one should be so shortsighted and naive to do so.

>>8238965

This. Spiderman was years ahead of its time in predicting DNA inter-species integration.

>>8229762
>It is commonly taught.
>In grade school

Possibly, but no one pays any goddamn attention except us nerds.

>>8207806
>That wouldn't address forms of cancer caused by carcinogens though, would it? How would you, for instance, make our DNA radiation-proof?

Can't. But exposure to carcinogens is manageable (like, quit smoking and start vaping, you stupid faggot), same as radiation.

Take some poor dope like /sci/ poster-boy Ishii...just reset his DNA to match normal human norms. Suddenly, things start healing. A flipping miracle.

Such things will be normal in fifteen years time.

>>8112462
>We're so far from this, we can't even tell if it's possible.

You're on a thread where numbskulls are talking casually about colonizing a rock 7.2x10^15 miles away, and you're intimidated by "the hard problem of consciousness".

Brain is hardware, DNA is BIOS, your "soul" is the software. The difficulty lies in extracting that information accurately, incrementally and gradually, so you never even notice that you "died".

>>8088898
>That's gotta be over 10,000 feet in height.

>he doesn't know what fog is

>>7703549
>Anthropological principle essentially says, that fine tuning is a social construct.

Fine tuning is confirmation bias.

Fixed. Now >>>/pol/

>>7552992

I remember some nerd at Wired analyzed how much energy would be necessary to move even one of the feet on those Pacific Rim robots...basically, lifting something as heavy as a loaded freight car, accelerating it to 150 mph, then decelerating it, in the space of a hundred feet or so.

I think it needed more energy than a nuclear aircraft carrier, as I recall...