/sci/ - Science & Math

>>7336070
It's already happened.

>>7336074
Elaborate.

>>7336070
Doesn't transhumanism include genetic engineering as well as physical and mental enhancement via technology?

>>7336079
Our ability to analyze the world and store information has been artificially evolved through the invention of computers and the internet.
Unless you are referring specifically to artificial biological evolution through altering our dna to achieve specific results.

>>7336070
I think first will come computers that will be able to identify genes in humans related to intelligence. then we can create a zygote from there hopefully to bore a child who will be significantly more intelligent while not being autistic or having other abnormalities. Ensuring mental health would be pretty important at that point.

So after that you can repeat the process where the more intelligent generation will create more complex/efficient computers to set off a new generation after themselves.

This could end in a lot of bad ways, but they all end up destroying humanity as we know it now. Could just end up with AGI machines after some amount of iterations though, and keeping those under control is just a joke I think.

All we can do is wildly speculate decades into the future though, so any one guess has a smaller chance of being right the further your reach out in your guess.

>>7336070
transhumanism is scifi glossed with pseudoscience

genetic engineering is at least actual science

>>7336246
What an incredibly retarded post.

>>7336251
>HURR MUH SINGULARITY
Fuck off.

>>7336251
The less there's known about a subject, a lot of time, the more books will be published about it. This includes authors peddling pseudoscience to non-scrutinizing consumers so they can make some quick cash while riding on the buzz word.

Doesn't mean that transhumanism is devoid of any meaning or validity. Just that many of the implications and conditions to it are pulled out of thin air from intellectually dishonest ass-hats.

Best to just focus on more near term things.

>>7336267
>HURR MUH STRAWMAN
Fuck off.

>>7336292
not the guy you're greentexting, but why point out a fallacy when you're just going to parrot back something and then tell him to fuck off? If you were interested in getting to some truth with this person I don't think you could say that your post was constructive. Just relax, disregard being actively dismissed and explain your reasoning.
Unless you just don't give a fuck, that's fine too I guess.
:^)

>>7336070
Transhumanism.

Genetic engineering will start 15-20 years from now, bearing its first fruits at the very least 30 years into the future (not counting the huge ethical opposition it will initially find in the west, which will most likely delay it too). We could reach strong AI before that.

>>7336307
when we get to strong ai or AGI, should the machine have rights if it passes a Turing test or something?

>>7336305
>what is irony

>>7336312
:^)

>>7336070
nano technology and cybernetic exoskeletons will be the keys to trans-humanism.

expect everyone in the world to be forcibly integrated into a single hive-mind via nano machines. If chem trails are real they are spraying us with self replicating nano machines that hi jack the language processing centers of the brain and the motor control center.

After that some genetic engineering for intelligence and a few choice traits, supplemented with high powered robotic exoskeletons and suits that have virtually limitless capability such as flight and increased agility and strength.

This will of course all be monitored by one or a few combined super intelligence that can network the entirety of our digital grid and all technology digitally up linked.


All in all, a small stepping stone in evolution. Nothing apocalyptic.

>>7336310
That's a very hard question. We feel like most of our rights are important because of reasons that couldn't necessarily apply to an artificial intelligence too. For example, take self preservation: for us it's a basic instinct, but one could perfectly build an AI which isn't interested in its self-preservation at all.

>>7336325
>, take self preservation: for us it's a basic instinct

not necessarily. take for instance suicide or even our propensity for incredibly destructive and fruitless wars

I think an AI would simply come to a logical conclusion of weather or not sustaining life was a worth while endeavor, and then do so based on that.

>>7336323
Of course the incorporating of every man woman and child into a single hive mind entity through self replicating networked nanites could seem very apocalyptic to the lay person experiencing such forced and unexplained integration.

I wouldn't be surprised if the process was already in motion.

>>7336323
>>7336339

If it's possible it is being done.

i honestly think you guys would have a better time on /x/, they are much more receptive to this stuff

>>7336325
In the case of a general intelligence. One that goes from nothing but an infrastructure of a mind and sensory inputs (vr or with body) and learns and matures over some period of time. I think if it had motives or drives, it may want to sustain those things, thus a need self-preservation.

>>7336335
>not necessarily. take for instance suicide or even our propensity for incredibly destructive and fruitless wars

that doesn't change the fact that 99.999% of humans will try to breath when drowning, if you get the point. This is because we are programmed by evolution to do so.

>I think an AI would simply come to a logical conclusion of weather or not sustaining life was a worth while endeavor, and then do so based on that.

An AI will surely be unpredictable, but don't forget that we'll have the advantage to code it.

>>7336351
>but don't forget that we'll have the advantage to code it.

We have the advantage to teach but that taught mind may formulate it's own independent ideas.

>>7336346
If you are insinuating that ideas such as hive minds, nano technology, genetic engineering, or any other form of transhumanism is some how outlandish or "paranormal" and thus impossible, I would refer you to the many scientific journals of the present day that are dedicated to achieving things like genetic engineering and neural nanite interfaces, not to mention free and easy websites such as this one

http://www.nanowerk.com/spotlight/spotid=8760.php..

http://www.theguardian.com/what-is-nano/mapping-the-mind-with-nanotechnology

Also recall the phenomenon of sci fi becoming sci fact, such as the computers and mobile phones of star trek becoming a reality in later decades.

In my experience there are a few philosophic laws and rules governing the universe, and within those confines anything is possible if the demand is high enough for it.

>>7336372
Just imagine.

Everyone in the world infected with neural seeking nanites, nanites capable of sending electrical signal to neurons and thus programming a false sensation or implanting an idea or coercing a certain movement.

Total control of a persons motor functions, total control of their subjective reality.

>>7336381
Form there every living organism can be forcibly integrated into one supreme consciousness.

A quantum super computer, programmed with the aggregate of Advanced AIs and advanced minds. Capable of dedicating the perfect application of work to any project, weather it be space exploration, research and development, defensive capabilities, un-tethered by the economics of competition, not limited mis communication.

It would be like giving birth to a literal god.
The ultimate end of transhumanism and the next step in evolution.

Deus ex machina
Who will help me build it?

>>7336389
It would all have to be done in secret, as there would be no end to the protests of those in support of individuality and free will.

>>7336389
no one wants to help me build it?

>>7336389
Pure nonsense. The complexity of such a system is fucking huge, it would be easier to have simple IA and machines, why would you want humans?

If we ever make anything that complex, then there would be no reason to keep humans or any other biological creature alive at all.

>>7336463
complexity is a relative and subjective term, I'm sure there are computers with the processing power and minds with the intellect necessary to execute it.

we have already made something similar in complexity and size, the world wide web.

each mind being a node in a network.

And why have a simple AI and machines when you can have advanced AI utilizing the brain, which is the most complex and powerful piece of matter in existence?

and once we join into a single hive mind consciousness, we transcend any label determined by the physical shell that mind would in habit.

>>7336463
>no reason to keep humans alive
let's hope the first mega AI we develop does not agree with your sentiment anon

>>7336251
how often do transhumanists insist on peer review

why is it retarded to prove transhumanism is not science

>>7336372
not paranormal, just not science or math

>>7336372
>>7336381
>>7336389
>>7336393
also if this is your idea for a sci-fi novel or something you should seriously consider dropping it because this is the stupidest thing i've ever read

transhumanists are some of the dumbest people on the planet i'm constantly surprised by how retarded the things they write are