/sci/ - Science & Math

Most of /sci/ is highly cynical.

That said I'm not one of them and I can wait to have affordable augmentations.

>>4982029
>and I can't wait to

The first one will be a natural language spelling/grammar/intention checking module.

a network of brains, you create several copy of your brains, store them in a proper place and access them remotely, imagine how much more complex you could become, your prior self would look like an ant.

> transhumanism

> superficial add-ons to the frail human body

Fuck that shit, upload my brain, run it at 100 times regular speed and give me root access (and a suitable interface with reality).

I'm in favor of augmentation. As for the type of augmentation I would only go for cybernetic augmentation if the procedure doesn't involve the removal of my genitalia or at the very least gives me a functional replacement. If not, then I would have to say bio-augmentation. I could have some designer testes installed that would elevate my testosterone allowing me to build muscle more easily and reduce the "recharge" time between ejaculations.

>>4982047
That's sweet and all, Tommy, but you're going to have to stretch yourself out until that becomes a possibility at the very least.

>>4982047
> superficial add-ons to the frail human body

Only in the early stages.

PS: I will become Gundam.

Do you guys believe that if there's is an exact copy of your mind, would you be able to experience a sort of double consciousness?

I honestly can't see it
I also often wonder how people can believe in the transfer of consciousness, if you would "upload" your brain anywhere, the uploaded part will not be your part of your continuous-consciousness.

An abomination which should never be allowed to exist.

The only thing which would be acceptable is nano machines fixing things but not modifying what they are fixing outside of its initial paramters.

>>4982059
Why does everyone think the only way to experience immortality is with a copy?

Okay, let me say this. We all know that the neurons in our mind are,at some point replaced, right? Well, let's say that you take an organic neuron inside of your mind, and instead of letting it replace itself with another orgnaic neuron, you insert a much more durable, powerful, and efficient synthetic neuron in it's place. And of-course, you continue onward until you replace all of them with synthetic versions of themselves until you have yourself a synthetic mind.

All of this can likely be done while you retain consciousness, therefore if possible there is no way that this could create a different person. "You" would still be "you".

Now, can anyone with more knowledge than I tell me what's wrong with this?

>>4982077
That ship of theses approach would probably be one of the smoother models of transition available as it allows the brain to adapt to it's physical changes.

But really there's no reason we shouldn't be able to just go to sleep in our flesh bodies, have a procedure done, and wake up in a synthetic body. Cessation of consciousness should be enough to make the process non-tramatic.

>>4982059
I don't really know why you quoted me I wasn't even talking about immortality, just consciousness transfer.

Your idea is pretty solid, though a bit vague,
what kind of replacements would those neurons be?
Organic? Inorganic?

>>4982088
I suspect it would be some kind of inorganic cell made up of nanomachines acting as the cell's organelles.

>>4982024
>transhumanism
Leave, and take this shit with you.

Also, name me a single person fundamentally opposed to classes or braces.

>>4982101
glasses*

In theory, it could be interesting...

In practice, no, avoid it like the plague.

We have to evolve WAY more as a species, and as a culture to take personal advantage of such potential technologies.

If this shit was introduced today, it would probably be reserved only for the "powerful and wealthy", and likely be utilized for oppressive purposes and to cause regimes to endure way past their "natural life span"...

"So long as men die, liberty shall never perish"...

But what if they don't?

TL;DR no because science isn't very politically influential

>>4982088
>I don't really know why you quoted me
A simple mistake. Sorry about that.

And as >>4982095 wrote, it would likely be inorganic, and eventually lead up to the transfer of the brain into a synthetic body. Or, better still, transfer the brain into a safer location, and link it to a synthetic body that can travel without fear of danger.

It would get over the issues faced with uploading, identity, and copying, anyway.

>>4982059

If you duplicate your running brain, there will simply be two of you. They won't be linked unless you create a link, so you won't experience a double consciousness, there will be two of you.

And for the same reason abortion isn't murder, it isn't murder to destroy a copy when an identical copy exists, so if we kill this me before it has time to gather new experiences, the only subjective experience that happens is of me being turned into a simulated me - I go to sleep on the operating table and wake up in a computer.

There are whooping cough epidemics because people don't trust vaccines.

Are you going to tell me that they will trust having computer chips surgically implanted? You really think they won't make conspiracy theories about how facebook reads your mind for marketing info and changes your memories?

Sorry. The human race is not compatible with transhumanism.

And no, you can't just genocide the people who disagree.

>>4982127

Then the clone can just kill you and live its life.

I wouldn't blame it. You want to create a new slave race?

>>4982127

> I go to sleep on the operating table and wake up in a computer.

No, you just die. There's no way to transfer the consciousness from one thing to another and retain that link. You will die and a copy of you, that is not you, will wake up.

You will cease to exist forever.

>>4982077
>We all know that the neurons in our mind are,at some point replaced, right?
>>We all know that the neurons in our mind are,at some point replaced, right?
>>We all know that the neurons in our mind are,at some point replaced, right?
>>We all know that the neurons in our mind are,at some point replaced, right?

Unless you turn your brain into one giant hippocampus, no, most neurons are not 'replaced'.

>>4982193
He means they are gradually replaced one at a time just like every other cell in the body. It's said that this gradual process is completed every decade. It's also the reason behind cancers. The cells have to produce more telomerase to extend the length of the telomeres that shape our DNA in order to exceed the Hayflick limit and keep on producing new cells. They eventually can't stop producing telomerase and the cells continue to divide indefinitely.

>>4982204

Too bad it's a stupid idea because there's no way to robotize your individual neurons.

And even if you did, it wouldn't be you. You are your brain. You will just be a shadow.

>>4982204
What does that have to do with the fact the most neurons (except for some in ther hippocampus and the olfactory bulb) stay the same in your brain throughout your entire life? They don't get renewed like other cells. So that argument doesnt' work for neurons.

>>4982048
>Get cybernetically augmented
>Wake up next day after the operation
>Feel between my legs
>My sex organs are missing
"I never asked for this."

>>4982119
>But what if they don't?
They will, eventually.
Whether a person lives for 10s, 10,000s, 10,000,000s of years, he's ultimately stuck between the two dark infinities before and after death.

>>4982239
Well done, I lol'd.

Transhumanism is shit. It would create a very large social gap between the richest and poorest, and the augmented would become overvalued while the not augmented would become undervalued. It would be like in the movie GATTACA. In my opinion, we should only aim for prothesis that give people the same capabilities that they had so they could live like before they lost their eye/hand/leg...
We should aim for something like organ cloning.

>>4982059

What if consciousness doesn't have to be continuous for personal identity to go on?

I guess it depends on what you judge as being most fundamental to you: Your long-term identity or your instantaneous mental state.

>>4982181

See above.

>>4982177

It doesn't have to be universally accepted. Few things are.

>>4984090

>social gap between the richest and poorest

http://wiki.transhumani.com/index.php?title=Open_Manufacturing
http://wiki.transhumani.com/index.php?title=SKDB
http://opensourceecology.org/wiki/Main_Page
http://wiki.transhumani.com/index.php?title=Molecular_Manufacturing

Ensuring that doesn't happen is also, incidentally, an h+ goal.

>>4984127
>ccm is back
It's like I'm 12 again and it's my birthday. Please, don't leave. :3

>>4982024
someone's been playing too much deus ex

>>4984154

>;3~~

>>4982059
Assuming you fed the second copy the exact same stimuli, there would be two brains with the same consciousness, but neither would be interacting with the other. And with different stimuli, there would be two consciousnesses, but not both being experienced by the same thing, if you understand what I'm saying. I'm afraid I'm not being very lucid.

>>4984090
There's already a massive one. Any new technology expands on it, but long-term, basic augmentations could easily become available to all but the poorest, and improve pretty much everyone's lives.

Has anyone heard the story of Theseus' ship? It's the one where they replace each part of the ship piece by piece over many years until the ship no longer has any original parts. Would you still call it the same ship? You had been until the last small deck plank or even the last nail had been replaced.

The same goes on in the body, You can't tell your arm now is entirely not the same arm you had years ago.

What if you replace parts of the brain, tiny fraction by tiny fraction over many years, making sure each part was working and your consciousness, motor skills, memory, etc. were still working and adapting to the new infrastructure?

Of course this is not possible now but it sure seems entirely plausible once we better understand all of the complex chemical reactions in order to properly model them in electronic parts.