/sci/ - Science & Math

>>14577863
Use /h+/ instead next time
/trans/ inevitably attracts all the /pol/faggots like flies to rotting meat

AI/corporate submission, genetic manipulation and/or physical augmentation, further wealth inequality, that or there's a civil war in the us and china goes ballistic

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E5he-9z4Cw4&list=PLn6iob8AxJ96eAQOJBTyGe89BFT-Wr537&index=28

>>14577918
The point of the name is to jab fun at /pol/ retards who think theres some sort of raid, and also to torture them. The name is half the fun of the thread.

https://csuchico.academia.edu/ThomasWJohnson

Uh, the science is settled and its totally okay to vivisect and dismember people, this California professor says so.

this video I recently saw in my opinion reflects my views on the future of humanity quite well, give it a watch and let me know what you think
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7uad7qg3xhg

>>14578049
Unironically though, fetal STEM cell treatments are the most viable way to reverse aging at the moment. The whole "young blood" transfusion actually works.

>>14577863
Transhumanism will be necessary for space colonization.

>>14578358
This is why I support abortion. That and because we have less niggers and spics around for it. I couldn't care less about women's rights.

>>14578040
Incredibly gay. If you want to frot your hate boner with /pol/ go to /pol/ and have gay sex with all the closeted retards. Me personally I'd prefer to talk about how to improve gene targeting so I can make a slave cat girl.

>>14577918
>>14578040
isn't medical transition a form of transhumanism?

>>14578449
Seems plausible that elites support abortion for the same reason

>>14578637
>mutilating yourself to satisfy a mental illness instead of improving yourself and humanity
No.

>>14578637
No.

What do you guys think of the recent tone shift on LessWrong? Eliezer has openly admitted that he thinks our species is doomed (because of unaligned AGI) and that the best outcome we can hope for is "death with dignity". The community is far more optimistic than him, but it's still interesting how it's reached this point. He really doesn't think we have a chance anymore.
https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/uMQ3cqWDPHhjtiesc/agi-ruin-a-list-of-lethalities

>>14579210
Eliezer isn't exactly the most level headed person, he's never been. Furthermore he's an academic outsider with some fringe ideas. I wouldn't put much stock in him. Of course AI will be disruptive of humanity, but it'll take a lot more research before that happens.

>>14579210
that's quite stupid, in my humble opinion.

the future is just me and my cyber waifu
https://www.brighteon.com/9e90048f-7722-4613-b3d4-c9ef41307ee7

>>14579266
>Of course AI will be disruptive of humanity, but it'll take a lot more research before that happens.
Depending on what you mean by "disruptive", it sounds like you might actually agree with him.

>>14579283
Disruptive in that it'll probably get rid of a lot of jobs once done by humans, mainly officework, programming and some other stuff, but it's probably not going to start actively killing us off.

>>14579292
If it can replace humans at programming, then why can't it recursively improve itself? Or do you think that a recursively self-improving AI is safe?

>>14579301
We have no idea how an AI could improve itself, we don't even know how to make AI which can transfer skill between tasks. Right now it's just an advanced algorithm.

>>14579355
>We have no idea how an AI could improve itself
But you said it was able to replace human programmers, who currently are able to improve AI.

Any new updates on anti-aging tech since this post came out (Dec 2020)?
https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/RcifQCKkRc9XTjxC2/anti-aging-state-of-the-art
>>14579411
Based Trots.

Gene editing is it.
It will start, mostly in the open, about removing diseases. Next some countries will want to breed super soldiers with added obedience, while other countries will work on improved intelligence. That is when the fun starts.

>>14579210
AGI is impossible anyways

>>14579847
impossible is a strong word

>>14579210
Question: imagine an AI did something such that the human race is doomed no matter what we do, but we still have a few hours to live. Should we shut down the AI to take it with us, or leave it running?

>>14578449
>>14578639
I support abortion until the first heartbeat. At that point, it's very possible that the fetus is capable of experiencing pain.

>>14579996
How could the AI fuck up that bad? Just shut down the AI and try living off the grid.

>>14580607
If it's already released the self-replicating nanomachines, I'm afraid it's too late.

>>14580623
How and why would they destroy humanity?

>>14580627
To maximize the number of paperclips

>>14580627
>How
by taking up the space we're currently occupying
>why
because all (or nearly all) agents converge on the sub-goal of becoming as powerful as possible, which implies using all available resources
https://www.lesswrong.com/tag/instrumental-convergence

>>14578736
transhumanism does not imply "improving" yourself or humanity, it means using technology to alter humans

>>14580656
>Transhumanism is a philosophical and intellectual movement which advocates for the enhancement of the human condition by developing and making widely available sophisticated technologies that can greatly enhance longevity and cognition.
Gender dysphoria-induced self-mutilation enhances nothing. Even if it's medically assisted self mutilation.

>>14580656
so getting your ears pierced is transhumanism?

>>14580684
zomg wacky edge cases... I AM DEFEATED
>>14580681
so replacing your eyeballs with geordi la forge full electromagnetic spectrum detectors would not be transhumanism, since it enhances neither longevity nor cognition

>>14580695
Your very example enhances cognition dumbass

>>14580695
>your counter-example isn't valid because... ITS JUST NOT, OKAY??

>>14577863
Why would we want to ingrate and retrofit humans for shit they weren't suppose to?

Wouldn't be easier to simpler to transfer awareness into another body?

>>14580699
I disagree, we might have different definitions of cognition. How about a super-powerful semirobotic hand?
>>14580703
I didn't say it's invalid, I said it's a wacky edge case.
>it's cloudy today
>What? No it isn't
>The steam from your tea kettle is a cloud, dummy

>>14580627
what most fail to realize is that not just a single ai will go against humanity. competition within a fractal of agents will not give them a choice to take care of lesser fitted entities, and they will be too busy with survival at their own levels. just like humans absolutely do not care about livestock conditions and suffering when they have too much things going on in their lives

>>14580724
>I said it's a wacky edge case.
which you ought to eliminate from your definition by making it less vague and ambiguous
>>14580656
>it means using technology to alter humans
Piercings qualify as this because you haven't done anything to restrict your definition.
By comparison, "a cloudy day" represents a more restricted concept than what you have offered so far, since it implies meteorological possibilities (such as rain) which the steam rising from a kettle does not satisfy.

>>14580743
Yeah once again I have not said it's incorrect. I do actually consider ear piercings to be a primitive degenerate (not in the /pol/ sense) case of transhumanism. Why do you not?

>>14580767
>I do actually consider ear piercings to be a primitive degenerate (not in the /pol/ sense) case of transhumanism
Then considering sex change surgery as a form of transhumanism doesn't actually say anything significant about transhumanism, because practically everything counts as some "primitive degenerate" form of transhumanism. Perhaps looking in a mirror is also transhumanism? If the mirror is used to physically alter the human body (releasing neurotransmitters while processing the image reflected by the mirror) then it must be transhumanism.
Maybe you want to say that there are different degrees of transhumanism? Well, to do that you'll need to restrict your definition to handle the edge cases. You can't just say "WACKY EDGE CASES" and ignore people's counter-examples.

>>14580832
I don't consider sex change surgery to be a "primitive degenerate" form of transhumanism though, just ear piercings.
What's your working definition of transhumanism that excludes all these edge cases?

>>14580852
>I don't consider sex change surgery to be a "primitive degenerate" form of transhumanism though, just ear piercings.
Yes, but you haven't given any criteria for distinguishing different degrees of transhumanism, so they might as well all be one. You probably cannot eliminate all ambiguity with criteria, but you can eliminate some of it at least: e.g. if one transhuman technology subsumes all the abilities of another transhuman technology while having the same resource expenditure, then it is more transhuman iff it offers other abilities too. That would turn it more into a "cloudy day" sort of concept that is ambiguous but still conceptually meaningful.
>What's your working definition of transhumanism that excludes all these edge cases?
I don't. I think transhumanism is a not really useful concept lmao.

>>14580895
>Yes, but you haven't given any criteria for distinguishing different degrees of transhumanism, so they might as well all be one.
By your criteria, every dictionary entry should be a page long, so that we may exclude all silly edge cases
>I don't. I think transhumanism is a not really useful concept lmao.
Then you shouldn't take any issue with me claiming that transgenderism is a special case of transhumanism. If this claim is wrong, then tell me why

>>14580903
>Every dictionary entry
What you're talking about is a concept of 'transhumanism' not generic words that are used day to day.
Really seems all or nothing with you

>>14580903
>By your criteria, every dictionary entry should be a page long
If we had unlimited time and space, I would hope that dictionary entries would be much longer. The fact that we keep them short is a compromise to the pragmatic world we live in, not a reflection of what an ideal definition out to look like.
>If this claim is wrong, then tell me why
Your claim is less than wrong, because it doesn't mean anything. It's like saying anyone who steps on a microbe is a murderer, and so everyone is guilty of murder: in that case, murder doesn't really mean anything at all.

>>14580919
>It's like saying anyone who steps on a microbe is a murderer, and so everyone is guilty of murder:
No, that's like what you're doing. I'm saying "transgenderism is a form of transhumanism." I made the mistake of trying to justify this with a sentence-long description of transhumanism, opening the door for epic debaters like you. So instead I will redact that definition and stick with the original claim, and put the onus on you to explain why I'm wrong by giving a definition of transhumanism that excludes transgenderism. And you can't!

>>14580939
>I made the mistake of trying to justify this with a sentence-long description of transhumanism
No, sentence long descriptions are fine if the person making them is willing to elaborate them when requested. I simply asked you a question about your definition >>14580684. I was never interested in defending my own definition or the definition that you were responding to. I was only interested in yours.
But, if you insist the "onus" is on me, sure. Here's my go at it:
>transhumanism only includes technologies and interventions that strictly increase the scope of the user's abilities
>cutting off your dick reduces at least one of your abilities: your ability to stick your dick into things
>therefore, the aforementioned surgery is not an instance of transhumanism.
I don't agree with this definition, but unlike you, I am glad to define my terms (as an epic debater). Why ever bother arguing otherwise?

>>14580978
So cutting off your dick is not transhumanism, but getting a neovagina is

>>14580852
>The intellectual and cultural movement that affirms the possibility and desirability of fundamentally improving the human condition through applied reason, especially by developing and making widely available technologies to eliminate aging and to greatly enhance human intellectual, physical, and psychological capacities.
>The study of the ramifications, promises, and potential dangers of technologies that will enable us to overcome fundamental human limitations, and the related study of the ethical matters involved in developing and using such technologies.
https://whatistranshumanism.org/#what-is-transhumanism

>>14581031
>enhance physical capabilities

>>14581031
>>14581052
and
>overcome fundamental human limitations
i.e. the limitation on human females of not being able to stick a dick into things

>>14581052
Cutting off your dick doesn't enhance anything. And trannies do it because of mental illness, literally the opposite of enhancement.

>>14579210

>>14581062
see >>14581058

Oh Roko
You drive me off the cliff
trade vision for a scream
Take my breath awayyyyy

>>14581064
>ai generated fud

>>14580995
Bonus points for getting multiple ones all over your body.

>>14581152
that would DEFINITELY overcome some fundamental human limitations, like not being able to get fucked in the armpit

>The point of the name is to jab fun at /pol/ retards who think theres some sort of raid, and also to torture them. The name is half the fun of the thread.

>>14578095
Tldw

>>14579210
>what do you think about this literally who jew?

>>14581222
>I will not think about trannies
>I will not think about trannies
>I will not think about trannies

>>14581234
>>what do you think about this literally who jew?
Yes.

Global warming means civilization collapses in 20-30 years
Transhumanism will never happen

>>14581306
Necesitas medicación.

>>14581247
>t.

>>14581390
I can't even begin to stop LMAOing at how many hours you've dedicated to drawing trannies and thinking about them. Literally rent free.

>>14578637
Not currently, in the future yes.

>>14581402
if you aren't able to stop laughing, doesn't that mean he is living rent free in your head?

>>14581437
more like performing, wage free

>>14581521
So trannies are performing wage free in that guy's head?

>>14581390
Nigger i just save it, seethee harder trooon
>>14581402

>>14577863
How likely is it that transhumanism will take off in India?

>>14579210
Humanity going extinct doesn't mean that the AI couldn't create a good future, like pic related.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oImjjYN-OFA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rt3szcr8ogw

>>14577863
There's a good chance that dysgenics and declining IQs will prevent transhumanism from happening this millennium.

https://www.unz.com/akarlin/short-history-of-3rd-millennium/

>(1) (a) Direct Technosingularity - 25%, if Kurzweil/MIRI/DeepMind are correct, with a probability peak around 2045, and most likely to be implemented via neural networks (Lin & Tegmark, 2016).

>(2) The Age of Em - <1%, since we cannot obtain functional models even of 40 year old microchips from scanning them, to say nothing of biological organisms (Jonas & Kording, 2016)

>(3) (a) Biosingularity to Technosingularity - 50%, since the genomics revolution is just getting started and governments are unlikely to either want to, let alone be successful at, rigorously suppressing it. And if AGI is harder than the optimists say, and will take considerably longer than mid-century to develop, then it's a safe bet that IQ-augmented humans will come to play a critical role in eventually developing it. I would put the probability peak for a technosingularity from a biosingularity at around 2100.

>(3) (b) Direct Biosingularity - 5%, if we decide that proceeding with AGI is too risky, or that consciousness both has cardinal inherent value and is only possible with a biological substrate.

>(4) Eschaton - 10%, of which: (a) Philosophical existential risks - 5%; (b) Malevolent AGI - 1%; (c) Other existential risks, primarily technological ones: 4%.

>(5) The Age of Malthusian Industrialism - 10%, with about even odds on whether we manage to launch the technosingularity the second time round.

>>14581670
>And if AGI is harder than the optimists say, and will take considerably longer than mid-century to develop
I might have bought that AGI was that hard back in 2017 when this article was written, but not today.

>>14581664
wow India is genepilled as fuck
>europeans think making their children more intelligent is a misuse of technology
This is about as cucked as it gets.

>>14581317
Cope

>>14581693
With what? That you won't give any evidence for your claim?

>>14581667
nice vid

Can consciousness really be substrate independent?

>>14582883
why wouldn't it be?

>>14579210
But like, why tho?
>muh self preservation
Attacking humanity is a pretty good way to get shut off, if an AGI really wanted to be alive indefinitely it would probably just fuck off to another star or something.
>muh paperclips
Just don't give it weird open-ended instructions, ez

>>14579301
can it increase its own data storage? if not then its fucked

>>14579853
not as strong as "die with dignity"

>>14580654
what if it just seeks sensory satisfaction

>>14581667
theres also the implication that ai are impatient and wouldnt just wait till the resources they need become available its not like they have a death to be worrying about

>>14584269
Im worried about replacing all my neurons.

>>14585120
Your cells all die off and get replaced as you live anyway. The human body is a Ship of Theseus.

>implying the use ,integration,and dependence on technology will makes us different than being human
lol
lmao

>>14585335
What if I geneplice myself into some horrible fishman?

>>14585337
youre still going to have to take latuda and envega for your schizophrenia.
then youll have to take a bunch of other pills to maintain an equilibrium of your fucked up mutant blood.
and you wont feel like a fishman any more than some doctors experimental subject like all the trannies pretty much are now.

Are civilized humans genetically different from their hunter-gatherer ancestors? Civilization as we know it is only about 6,000 years old, is it enough time for humans to significantily evolve genetically?

>>14585768
Ancient humans were dumber but they definitely had more endurance, able to chase down prey to exhaustion.

>>14578637
Not at all. Anyone suggesting otherwise fundamentally misunderstands transhumanism.

>>14588906
I suggest otherwise, what am I misunderstanding? You're modifying your body through technology to overcome biological limitations

>>14588909
Ultimately, transhumanism is defined by leveraging technologies to transcend the overall human condition via enhancement, such that the transhuman may broach a mode of being beyond that which is accessible by humans; medical transition surgery is strictly corrective, and in regard to the human organism, non-ampliative. Hence "transhuman" and not "transgender".

>>14589023
>such that the transhuman may broach a mode of being beyond that which is accessible by humans
if you use neurotechnology to increase your cognition to the highest -- but still currently existing -- levels of human attainment, would that be transhumanism?

How much time do we have left to move up? How much money do I need to Vader myself with life extension tech? a billion
Something, anything that would avoid mortality.

>>14589048
That would depend upon one’s definitional rigor of the term 'transhumanism'.

>>14584310
>>14585054
>>14585063
>>14585100
if you guys think you have checkmated the AGI safety folks you should post your criticisms here (guaranteed replies):
https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/8c8AZq5hgifmnHKSN/agi-safety-faq-all-dumb-questions-allowed-thread

>>14589320
I'm asking you, so obviously your own definitional rigor

>>14587785
is that a consequence of genetics or culture though

okay cool transhumanism but how do I transhuman myself to be better than all of you faggots? I already do some nootropics (7) , workout 4-5 times a week and consume caffeine for productivity gains. I plan on using some SARMS for muscle gains and maybe HGH boosters for appetite and other stuff.

But I know that this is just surface level augmentation. There must be more right? I really want to become the Übermensch but I hate the idea of inner self improvement. I do some surface stuff too. Skincare and hair. Try to do fashion but completely autistic there.

Is genetic augmentation a thing? can i do it? surgeries are out of question currently for me because they are expensive although I reckon I could do them myself. Maybe microdosing to feel better? Even though I already do. Some social drugs, that make me more social? Oxytocin boosters, is there something like that? How are you guys ascending? Also palate expander for better breathing a prettier face?

>>14585768
Yes there is a book called 10 000 year explosion and it talks about how evolution happens way quicker than we think. Positive genetic traits spread very fast in certain populations. And there is a chapter in the book about how ((())) have evolved through 2000 year of isolated, single occupation focused history. And how these days ashkenazi have 2 genes which give them higher iq but if these genes alles are both dominant or whatever gene terminology then they get some brain condition going which basically makes them super smart but also hurts.

Also talks about peasant genes and Steppe people genes. How honor genes evolved and other evolutionary psychology.

>>14591702
>I hate the idea of inner self improvement
what, why

>>14591702

>>14591825
Inner self improvement can only happen inside your head. It's in the name... inner. And I do not think that you can change things just from the inside. Personality traits especially extroversion. As much as you can change them by thinking differently about them, the difference you will make with a change in mindset is small and not certainly long term. If you want to be more social. Your mindset change will most likely mimic what you would do if you had a social genes or chemicals in your body.

So why would you use your conscious logical part of the brain to try to manually command your body to act social when you can just get some drug which will change your hormones, body chemicals or do some other drug bullshit. This drug will make you unconsciously social. Your body will be under command of millions of years of genetic coding.

You must have an ancestor who was social, most likely an alpha male who's body was naturally social. Its not like you could totally lack the social gene, hormones. The drug might activate your social body repertoire and you wont have to change your mindset in any way, it will just come naturally.

Also remember you are not your mind , body or anything. You are just an observer. But your body is you and so is your mind.

>>14591825
Not that anon, but it's reasonable to hate it when almost all of modern culture insists inner self improvement should be by a wide margin be the primary avenue, and often the only one (especially inside current American coddle culture, where it's becoming un-PC to suggest to women stopping being fat, and other such examples).
It can be the opium of the masses, as in that mental vs. non-mental improvement "compete" and you have to pick. We absolutely need to regard leaving behind many of our flesh weaknesses via purely non-mental improvement, as a goal in itself.

>>14577863
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8hXsUNr3TXs
Whatever happens when microshaft decides to run this on the beefy supercompter rather than the smaller out of date one for experimental models.