/sci/ - Science & Math

Well obviously they're wrong because I said so.

>>1147247

I was'nt implying that my opinion was fact, Im hardly qualified to make any sort of serious predictions about the rate of technological advancement in any field.

Hence asking for educated opinions on the matter.

I played Deus Ex 3 seventeen years ago when it was called Syndicate.

That trailer was the usual uninspired filler.

>>1147238


Good chance? Yea, he's right.

Some aspects of technology are growing exponentially. Its hard to imagine the progress sometimes. My grandparents we born before you could buy a television and now I'am talking to some faggot over the internet from who knows where and the progress is acceleration in some areas.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HoD6lGW1Cvw

>>1147238

Some of will be possible. Others not so much.

General cybernetics sure it's happening now and as the previous anon stated technology is exhibiting accelerated returns.

Cybernetics that give people superhuman strength? that is unlikely if you just added super strong arms onto a normal human body they would rip you apart the first time you tried to use them.

I don't think healthy humans would have any major cybernetic modifications (arms, eyes, etc.). Targeting computers and cyborg arms moving so well are just pure sci-fi.

Riot police won't have fucking expensive robot tanks. Invisibility tech won't be like in the trailer.

>>1147292

Thats incredible, assuming sufficient demand those prosthetics will be pretty awesome ten years down the line.

>>1147352

The question is, what happens when these prosthetics become superior to healthy limbs in certain respects (dexterity, grip strength, durability etc). I can easily imagine that there are more than a few people who would want to 'upgrade'.

as for my opinion

i think prosthetic limbs/etc will become more advanced, but don't we will have anything connecting to our brains by 2027

>>1147359

There doesn't have to be any market demand for super-human prosthetics. Dean Kamen's Luke Arm is funded by DARPA.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R0_mLumx-6Y

>>1147394

We already have prosthetics interfacing with our brains today.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/8677132.stm

>>1147394

Brain/computer interfaces are big at the moment though. The people that first crack those will make a fortune. They have military and entertainment uses.

>>1147394
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/606938.stm

in 2000

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ewqir37HEQw
what about this?

>>1147428
prosthetics are retarded now, nobody can judge the demand of real bionic shit yet

>>1147437
yawn, a prediction is never obvious. try again, mr. futurista

>>1147488

Did he even make an obvious prediction?

>>1147428

Damn

Invisibility, kinda

Advanced prosthetics, a little more

Giant tank things, mainly for military use,

Advanced bio optics, yes

Detroit still standing, no

Let me try to put it into perspective for you, op. IF you poured, let's say..., the US military budget into researching these technologies, you picked the best neurologists, materials engineers, robotics and electronics specialists and software designers, you could do this today. Not a fucking problem, at all.

The reason you don't see it is because funding and expertise is dispersed among many private initiatives, mostly commercial, which are interested in developing only a certain facet of this technology, and only in a certain scope, and then monetize any small advancement for as long as they can.

It's not that we couldn't do it today, it's just that there's no drive towards it - nobody who could decide to make it happen has any interest in making it happen now. And no, after a certain age and when you're earning a few millions a year, no CEO in any major corporation is going to channel their R&D into this just because it would be "cool".

Looks like a fucking badass game I'll be buying if the games as good as the trailer!

>>1147481

>prosthetics are retarded now

Subjective opinion ftw? DARPA is actually almost ready for their second generation model.

>nobody can judge the demand of real bionic shit yet

DARPA spending huge chunks of cash and Touch Bionics i-LIMB Pulse already selling "bionic shit" isn't proof of demand? GTFO.

>>1147546

I would have thought the applications for prosthetics among wounded veterans alone would drive research forward.

It wouldnt suprise me if the military is trying to get to the point where a soldier whose arm has been blown off can return to active duty with a prosthetic.

Transhumanism thread?

>>1147663

Fuck yes! I always loved the Helios-merger in the Deus Ex series, even if the second game was shit.

Greatest "government" known to man: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xBeoreJr4Yc

the tech in that trailer looks like its from the year 2057 not 27. however i think that nanobots, like in deus ex, will replace these crude mechanical apparates.

>>1147590

heh, prosthetics for veterans :/ Don't take me wrong, a lot of research is taking place. The army's R&D budget is monstrous (and that's a good thing, at least someone is a big spender in tech) but there's not much being done in integration. You have some tech being developed here, some tech being developed there... if you've watched Sci-Fi Science you may have noticed there's an MIT team developing carbon nanotube applications for the army. Now, somewhere else there's a team developing some prosthetics with a brain interface. Somewhere else someone is developing ultra high resolution flexible imaging technology. You have all these techs being developed in isolation, which means they'll have to first mature separately in whatever markets their developers aim for before someone thinks of combining them into an integrated cybernetics solution.

But, regardless, if and when the tech in the video becomes available, whenever it may be, it'll still be prohibitively expensive.

>>1147590

the sad shit is:

it is cheaper to train another one, plus you can't erase PTSD so easily

>>1147841
They get cheaper over time. Your point?

i bet we have walking terminator robots to kick taliass in 2027.

>>1147706
F*ck yea Helios FTW!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fn3Pn9ASD_A

@5:00

>>1147706
Fuck yeah Helios FTW!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fn3Pn9ASD_A

@5:00

>>1147943
for youtube if you put #t=m5s00 on the end it will snap to 5 mins 0 seconds when you open it

>>1148772
whoops got it backwards, its #t=5m00s

Deus Ex 3 is going to be a really shitty game.

>>1147288

Holy fuck, Syndicate was 17 years ago?

I feel old...

>>1147237
ad0ae79e28c9b0e3e75b68e493c226ae kindly re move you r ille gal clo ne and give back our dom ain chrisb ear pol e see http:// tinyurl . com / 36wo8m5

2027? Nah.

2057? We'll be getting there.

I just hope that I get to play AGAINST the police in that game. Fuck cops. Authoritarian pricks.

2027 is only 17 years away. Considering how the fuel cell was invented 30 years ago and its still not widely available, don't hold your breath.

>>1149677
you can blame the oil based shadow govt for that.

If we rise up we will have perfect tech be the end of 2012!

>>1149682

I think there will be advanced prosthetics in 2027. Companies such as Research In Motion have already made great advancements in the technology. While the main designs of mechanical prosthetics interacting with the brain is still very young, I can easily see it being very common in 17 years. Just look at the technological advancements we've made in the past 15 years. Computers are a hundred times as powerful and a hundred times smaller, machines are a hundred times more precise and fluid and if you take into account the exponential growth of such technologies, well, there you go.

Then again, this is pretty cyberpunk, so it's pretty optimistic in terms of how much we'll achieve.

>>1149560
seconded

>>1149682
actually we can blame them for not developing geothermal which is clearly the best and simplest option

>>1147546

>The reason you don't see it is because funding and expertise is dispersed among many private initiatives, mostly commercial, which are interested in developing only a certain facet of this technology, and only in a certain scope, and then monetize any small advancement for as long as they can.

The sad thing is a lot of people actually believe this, but aim for profit does actually further research and even more the science behind useful applications and their implementation. Gov't funded research brought us uhm..teflon, private inventors cars, planes, computers,...

>>1149628
douchebag

what, mad you cant smoke pot and have sex in public? LOL

all the stuff about you guys complain about that are banned by cops, are unimportant shit like drugs and sex related crap.

Take em out. Ok. Now, criminals. Gotta deal with them.

>>1149978
>Now, criminals. Gotta deal with them.

Personally, haven't seen many criminals come from a stable social environment.

We'll probably have the technology but it won't be so widely available.

>>1147292

Internet was invented over 20 years ago. Sometimes people overestimate the progress of technology. It's gonna go up, but saying IN DA FOOCHURE doesn't mean shit, look at where we are now, and then think how long it will take for the technology to develop, then for it to become cheap enough for mass production/use and then for distribution. Shit takes a long time, more than 17 years.