• NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!

    Subscribe to The Paracast Newsletter!

Substrate-independent minds

Free episodes:

(Nanowerk Spotlight) Neural engineering is an emerging discipline that uses engineering techniques to investigate the function and manipulate the behavior of the central or peripheral nervous systems. Neural engineering is highly interdisciplinary and relies on expertise from computational neuroscience, experimental neuroscience, clinical neurology, electrical engineering and signal processing of living neural tissue, and encompasses elements from robotics, computer engineering, neural tissue engineering, materials science, and nanotechnology.

In order for neural prostheses to augment or restore damaged or lost functions of the nervous system they need to be able to perform two main functions: stimulate the nervous system and record its activity. To do that, neural engineers have to gain a full understanding of the fundamental mechanisms and subtleties of cell-to-cell signaling via synaptic transmission, and then develop the technologies to replicate these mechanisms with artificial devices and interface them to the neural system at the cellular level. A group of European researchers has now shown that carbon nanotubes may become the ideal material for repairing damaged brain tissue.

"Our findings show that carbon nanotubes, which, like the nervous cells of our brain, are excellent electrical signal conductors and form intimate mechanical contacts with cellular membranes, thereby establishing a functional link to neuronal structures," Laura Ballerini, a professor of physiology, together with Maurizio Prato, professor of organic chemistry, both at the University of Trieste, Italy, explain to Nanowerk. "Such a functional and mechanical link might favor electrical shortcuts between the proximal and distal compartments of the neuron, therefore improving neuronal performance.

" The study was conducted in Prato's and Ballerini's laboratories at the University of Trieste, Italy, in collaboration with Henry Markram's Laboratory of Neural Microcircuitry at Ecole Polytechnique Federale de Lausanne (EPFL) in Switzerland, and Michel Giugliano (now an assistant professor at the University of Antwerp). The team has published their findings in the December 21, 2008 online edition of Nature Nanotechnology ("Carbon nanotubes might improve neuronal performance by favouring electrical shortcuts"). These findings represent one of the earliest attempts at linking electrical phenomena in nanomaterials to neuronal excitability.

For their experiments, the team deposited single-wall or multi-wall carbon nanotubes on a glass substrate and subsequently defunctionalized them by thermal treatment to form glass slides covered with a purified and mechanically stable thin film of about 50-70 nm thickness. This dense network of nanotubes acts as a largely resistive network that permits long-range electrical connectivity. The effect of nanotubes on neuronal integrative properties was then investigated by comparing the electrophysiology of rat hippocampal cells cultured on control substrates to those grown on a thin film of purified nanotubes for 8 to 12 days.

Read more: Nanotechnology to repair the brain
 
Thanks to the application of recent advances in nanotechnology to the nervous system, a novel generation of neuro-implantable devices is on the horizon, capable of restoring function loss as a result of neuronal damage or altered circuit function. The field will very soon be mature enough to explore in vivo neural implants in animal models.

Read more: Nanotechnology coming to a brain near you
 
Yes any new system will bring with it new system specific problems.

Let me ask you this, which is better suited to storing and retrieving word for word the entire works of shakespere ?

The biological data bank or the artificial one.

Purpose designed systems are by inherant nature improvements on biological ones, birds fly. we fly at hypersonic speeds longer distances.

We may even use DNA itself as the storage medium, or cultured biocells may work better than silicone storage, the optimum might even in the short term be a combination of both.

We are now in a situation like molecular biology was a few years ago when people started to map the human genome and make the data available,” Meier says. “Our colleagues are recording data from neural tissues describing the neurons and synapses and their connectivity. This is being done almost on an industrial scale, recording data from many, many neural cells and putting them in databases

Brain On A Chip? -- ScienceDaily

Canadian scientists have successfully connected brain cells to a silicon chip to "hear" conversation between brain tissue.

Human brain on a microchip nearly ready - The Hindu

I created this thread to bookmark emergent technologies in this field because i suspect its related to the UFO enigma.

If im right a hundred years from readers will say that mike guy was ahead of his time

If im wrong im wrong

Im not here to change anyones mind on this topic, if you dont think its possible thats fine

As i have shown history is replete with scientists who said it cant be done, only to be ignored by other scientists who did it anyway.

The difference is, those who say it cant be done cant prove their negative

The research being done in this area presents a path to testing the idea in a way that is empirical, something the naysayers cant do

My personal view is everything in the physical universe can be deconstructed, understood and replicated. If consciousness doesnt just reside in the brain (though i think it does) then we will chase that down too, deconstruct the mechanism and replicate that too.

Just my opinion, im not trying to force that worldview on anyone else.

But i think the methodology to try, and either succeed or fail, beats deciding in advance it cant be done and not even trying

I appreciate your patience Mike - I'm not concerned with naysayers or proving negatives. I'm interested in this belief:

"My personal view is everything in the physical universe can be deconstructed, understood and replicated. If consciousness doesnt just reside in the brain (though i think it does) then we will chase that down too, deconstruct the mechanism and replicate that too."

... which I think, combined with a belief in unlimited human progress is the dominant, if implicit, belief system/secular religion in the developed world. I'm interested in it's history, it's ethical implications and it's alternatives.

This was my world view for many years and it's taken me a long time to root up my own
assumptions and claims and examine them. I want to see how solid they are and how well its proponents can defend and support them with specifics.

I think it is generally unexamined as most adherents take it for true and don't bother to see it in historical or philosophical context because they don't see either context as important and indeed they may not prove to be.

(I'm not saying you do or don't fit into any of those categories or that you are religious about it - but it appears to me that many are - I would be curious though as to how many share your positive regard of the Cybermen ... ;-)

True or not it seems to me that belief in these ideas has a major impact on where we are going and so I think these beliefs and their adherents should bear examination ... and the underlying assumptions and their implication laid bare.

I doubt that will happen though, If history is a guide we will do our soul searching post mortem.

Something probably very different than what we imagine now will come of these technologies ... something both sides will manage to claim victory over.










Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
"However, one could also make the argument the transhumans would be so flexible -- cognitively and physically -- that they would be able to adapt immediately to any environmental conditions."

So the common cold killed the martians and boredom will kill the transhumans. It would be the first thing they'd have to adapt to.

Anyway, that's not making an argument ... it's making a proclamation. Immortal, invulnerable ... getting pretty close to reinventing the gods here.
Hm, I'm not convinced transhumans would be bored, especially if there does turn out to be (intelligent) life elsewhere in the universe. But it is an interesting question we can essentially capture in this way: Is God bored?

We need some inkling of how an immediate universal adaptation principle IUAP would work ... but I think that's a confused notion - because adaptation isn't one thing, one quality or characteristic. Adaptation might require a step backward, for example. Adaptation might involve giving up the ability to adapt to any change in the environment instantly ... every god and superhero gives up his power at some point. One thing the hive mind should get done before this IUAP is enabled, is any tweaking of unwanted behaviors ... because once transhumans can adapt to any thing immediately, there would be no reprogramming rogue elements because they'd adapt to any breach in their integrity and I'd hate to see what IUAP vs IUAP would look like. It would be like two Volvos colliding ...
I once was able to ask Ray Kurzweil this very question directly via email. I found a printed copy of the email, and I will scan and upload it here in the future.

It might essentially come down to a resource grab; the transhuman who had the most resources -- whose mind was embodied in the majority of the material of the universe -- would be able to overpower all other transhumans by brute force. So once one tranhuman had control of over 51% of the material universe, they could simply overpower the remaining 49%.

However, like real warfare, it's not just about power and resources but strategy and intelligence. as well Some transhumans may be less powerful than others, but also smarter. Yes, this essentially speculation about a war between gods. There might be an intelligence arms race.

There's also the potential that the universe is infinite and that transhumans or AI could spread infinitely. They may even overlap. For example, it's conceivable that this had already occurred in our universe, and one entity has expanded its mind to the point where this entity is embodied by the entire universe. However, this entity may allow other entities to form within it, for example, us.

"Indeed, I've made the argument that what sets humans apart from other animals is our staggeringly advanced ability to adapt -- if not physically, behaviorally. Having said that, we do adapt physically, but we use technology to do so, the baby sling noted above being just one example."
Staggeringly advanced ability ... maybe, may be ... but compared to what other medium sized anthropoid with a similar evolutionary history? We have an n of 1. @mike - what's the average lifespan of a species? You quoted it recently. If I'm right, we've not been around very long by that metric ... so the jury isn't in on our adaptability. We don't know whether to be staggered or not. Ants have been around in the same environment for much longer, have a very broad range of adaptations, they farm mushrooms and use anti-fungal agents, herd aphids, engage in slavery, have sophisticated communication and live in clean, crime free underground climate controlled cities. And by bio-mass there is as much of them as us.
Ants are surely adaptive, no disagreements there. They may even have a level of "active" neural adaptability too. But would we really argue that ants are more adaptable than humans?

Theoretically, transhumans might be so cognitively and physically flexible and adaptable, that it would far, far outstrip the cognitive/physical flexibility nature had previously offered via replication and natural selection, epigenetics, and neural networks.
You could argue that such adaptations are "just" another natural strategy ... as far as we know, humans are 100% USDA organic and all natural and if we use that wholesome intelligence to create transhumans, then they are natural too - Mother Nature still gets credit. If it's a scratch ... then Mother Nature will just go back to tweaking Her beloved ants.
I would argue that. You could call it passive adaption or active adaption, or dumb adaptation and teleologic adaptation. Either way, it's still natural.

Of course, this all assumes that life and mind are not supernatural. We can't say they aren't for sure just yet.
 
id8760.jpg


TSEM micrograph of a cultured rat hippocampal neuron grown on a layer of purified carbon nanotubes. (Image: Laura Ballerini, University of Trieste)

In a sample of cultures grown on nanotubes we quantified – in terms of postsynaptic currents frequency – the presence of a significant increase in synaptic activity, compared to control cultures," says Ballerini. "This increased activity represents a typical feature of neurons grown on nanotube substrates." During the last few years, several research groups supported the use of carbon nanotubes substrates as potential biocompatible materials that promote cell attachment, differentiation, growth and long term neuronal survival.

Ballerini notes that the growth of functional brain circuits on a conductive carbon nanotubes meshwork was always accompanied by powerful physiological changes, in the form of a significant enhancement in the efficacy of neural signal transmission, suggesting that the electrical conductivity of the carbon nanotube-substrate might be underlying these physiological effects.

So Nanotubes enhance efficacy of neural signal transmission.....
Are more durable than biological tissue
Can be programmed to self repair

And this is just one emergent technology that might get us there

Quantum computing is another prospect

Google Buys Quantum Computer for Artificial Intelligence Lab at NASA | Singularity HUB
 
I would be curious though as to how many share your positive regard of the Cybermen ...

As ive said my problem with the Cybermen is not in the motive, but the means.

This mindfile would be run on "mindware," a kind of software for consciousness.

For the sake of the plot (making them monsters) the mindware is the dominant protocol the mind file suppressed.
This makes them seem single minded and driven, which defeats the purpose of upgrade imo. The idea is to preserve the Mindfiles.

The mindware should be in the background like the autonomic protocols we currently use to keep the heart beating, lungs breating etc etc.

Mindware will run in the background running parity checks on the mindfile, keeping links with the various datanets active, driving the self repair protocols etc etc.

The problem with the cybermen is the mindwares survival programming is over the top, becoming the overiding driver behind the entity.
 
Is God bored?

I don't want to get this thread off topic - we could start another thread on these topics.

Google "adaptability of ants vs humans" - yes, we can argue that ... but elsewhere.

EO Wilson's The Ants (1990) is the book to start with.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
As ive said my problem with the Cybermen is not in the motive, but the means.



For the sake of the plot (making them monsters) the mindware is the dominant protocol the mind file suppressed.
This makes them seem single minded and driven, which defeats the purpose of upgrade imo. The idea is to preserve the Mindfiles.

The mindware should be in the background like the autonomic protocols we currently use to keep the heart beating, lungs breating etc etc.

Mindware will run in the background running parity checks on the mindfile, keeping links with the various datanets active, driving the self repair protocols etc etc.

The problem with the cybermen is the mindwares survival programming is over the top, becoming the overiding driver behind the entity.

Right ... More specifically I'm curious how many find a hive mind concept appealing (I am correct that you do?) and if it's been presented positively in any sci fi ... I'll do a search.
 
"Upgrading the substrate from a flaky error,accident and disease prone biological platform to a durable self repairing non biological one is a logical expression of surival of the fittest. If the new substrate is better than othe old, more fit for purpose, If it addresses and fixes the shortcoming of our native substrates then it must be fitter than the "

flaky error disease prone ... I'll have to think about that ... I see the "biological platform" itself as continuous with the ecosystem, of dependent origination not as a self contained individual - taking in from the environment and ultimately returning to it and that is what survives ... the entire ecosystem ... and that system is durable and self repairing, what we call disease is part and parcel as I suspect is what we call error ...

Another question - What non biological materials would you use?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Just found this link with the idea above to "deep ecology"

"One of the basic ideas behind the Buddha's teaching of mutual interdependence is that ultimately there is no demarcation between what appears to be an individual creature and its environment. Harming the environment (the nexus of living beings of which one forms but a part) is thus, in a nontrivial sense, harming oneself. This philosophical position lies at the heart of modern-day deep ecology and some representatives of this movement (e.g.Joanna Macy) have shown that Buddhist philosophy provides a basis for deep ecological thinking."
 
As ive said my problem with the Cybermen is not in the motive, but the means.

[QUOTE]This mindfile would be run on "mindware," a kind of software for consciousness.[/QUOTE]

For the sake of the plot (making them monsters) the mindware is the dominant protocol the mind file suppressed.
This makes them seem single minded and driven, which defeats the purpose of upgrade imo. The idea is to preserve the Mindfiles.

The mindware should be in the background like the autonomic protocols we currently use to keep the heart beating, lungs breating etc etc.

Mindware will run in the background running parity checks on the mindfile, keeping links with the various datanets active, driving the self repair protocols etc etc.

The problem with the cybermen is the mindwares survival programming is over the top, becoming the overiding driver behind the entity.


Mike, can you provide the provenance of the terms 'mindware' and 'mindfile', and the source of the quotation you inserted, which I've highlighted in blue? If you have links to a site or sites where these terms originate and are defined, that would be helpful. Thanks.
 
As ive said my problem with the Cybermen is not in the motive, but the means.



For the sake of the plot (making them monsters) the mindware is the dominant protocol the mind file suppressed.
This makes them seem single minded and driven, which defeats the purpose of upgrade imo. The idea is to preserve the Mindfiles.

The mindware should be in the background like the autonomic protocols we currently use to keep the heart beating, lungs breating etc etc.

Mindware will run in the background running parity checks on the mindfile, keeping links with the various datanets active, driving the self repair protocols etc etc.

The problem with the cybermen is the mindwares survival programming is over the top, becoming the overiding driver behind the entity.

I have a copy of Dr Who - series 7 I think ... Matt Smith faces an upgraded army of Cybermen. I'm mostly familiar with Tom Baker (who??) as Who. So this will be the first time to see the Cybermen in their modern incarnation.

The Cybermen (and the Daleks) raise interesting questions which I hope are appropriate to this thread, if not maybe we can move them to the C&P.

1. How do we get people to accept the hive mind, consciousness uploads or cybernetization?

I have no doubt Transhumanis technology will be pushed as far as possible - but if the issue is survival in the near future, good arguments can be made to find multiple strategies - and especially those involving technology that might be closer in reach:

space arks, stations, colonization and physical modifications that don't completely alter who and what we are, because selling the hive mind or consciousness uploads is a PR game and could (already does?) involve getting people to think of themselves as self contained machines as you do @mike (and you're not alone and that's not a knock - see last paragraph below)

We should lead with cyborgs and prosthetics - an easy sell today:

Increasing biophobia will be helpful but that's already occurring:

As cybernetization increases people can compare the sleek fetishized components on sale to their own

"flaky error,accident and disease prone biological platforms"

Made up of:

"Hair of the head, Hair of the body, Nails,Teeth, Skin, Flesh, Tendons, Bones, Spleen, Heart, Liver, Membranes, Kidneys, Lungs, Large intestines, Small intestines, Gorge, Feces, Brain,Gall, Phlegm, Lymph, Blood, Sweat, Fat, Tears,Oil,Saliva, Mucus, Oil in the joints, Urine."

Aesthetic prosthetics ... we could call it.

2. I'm not up on Transhumanism - but the dominant metaphors - and I think this is our culture (and I think that's changing) - are industrial (you mentioned replacement parts) and computational.

So the question Is: does anyone who calls themselves Transhumanist focus on making us more human? Better connected and more interdependent, more empathetic ...

perhaps raising Dunbars Number?

Dunbar's number - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

And this not for sentiment but for pragmatism as there is good reason to think that our intelligence and self consciousness are inseparable from these qualities ... this may be at the root of our repulsion to thinking of ourselves as machines or conceiving of life in a hive mind ... CS Lewis said social insects are an unnerving combination of the feminine and the mechanical (that has to be taken in context).

But is all that fair?

I found this article on the search:

" positive portrayals of the hive mind "

On our Fear of the Hive Mind | Majestic Equality

Worth reading but I think in the end it is a description of an enhanced human social network rather than a hive mind.

Question III is whether our finitude itself and our knowledge of our own mortality is a driver and structuring force of our intellect? And without this force what would we, in time, become ?

4. Could it then be that the platforms we have actually aren't shaky, flaky error accident and disease prone but rather - at the species level - are inexpensive, composed of widely available materials, robust, adaptive, deeply interconnected and highly optimized? After all we aren't Natures first crack at Genus Homo and even if we discount all notions of teleology in evolution and count only chance and necessity I think we should respect the effects of deep time over a complex environment - when attempting to improve on or simulate those processes.

And if so, as we move forward should we see these qualities as classics, core components - essential to maintain and even improve on if possible? The goal being to become more human rather than less.

However @mike you have a different intuition and I think that's a minority report on our species - an undercurrent that evolves genetically and socially - a kind of potential to go another way should the environment change. (Note for engineers: that kind of blind foresight has to be a part of anything that wants to survive ) ... lots of people think the way you do and I think always have.

So at this point we have:

Independent self contained and replaceable units organized in a hive mind

Interdependent, interconnected individuals in a dense social network.

There's no VS there ... I think I was wrong on that.

What if Transhumanism is Humanism part 2 and what if the Borg live and evolve among us and what if they already do and always have?




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
1. How do we get people to accept the hive mind, consciousness uploads or cybernetization? ...

We should lead with cyborgs and prosthetics - an easy sell today:
There will be early adopters, late adopter, and luddites.

Cybrogs and prosthetics will indeed be the way to go. People will use them for all the same reasons we use them today:

Plastic surgery, glasses, cognitive enhancing medications, video games for pleasure, and social media to stay informed of the social doings of others.

Transhumanist technologies will provide the same functions but be more integrated with our bodies. They will sell themselves to a large portion of the human population.

Increasing biophobia will be helpful but that's already occurring:

As cybernetization increases people can compare the sleek fetishized components on sale to their own

"flaky error,accident and disease prone biological platforms"

Made up of:

"Hair of the head, Hair of the body, Nails,Teeth, Skin, Flesh, Tendons, Bones, Spleen, Heart, Liver, Membranes, Kidneys, Lungs, Large intestines, Small intestines, Gorge, Feces, Brain,Gall, Phlegm, Lymph, Blood, Sweat, Fat, Tears,Oil,Saliva, Mucus, Oil in the joints, Urine."

Aesthetic prosthetics ... we could call it.
Have you seen what the Major from Ghost in the Shell looks like? Sold.

So the question Is: does anyone who calls themselves Transhumanist focus on making us more human? Better connected and more interdependent, more empathetic ...

And this not for sentiment but for pragmatism as there is good reason to think that our intelligence and self consciousness are inseparable from these qualities ... this may be at the root of our repulsion to thinking of ourselves as machines or conceiving of life in a hive mind ... CS Lewis said social insects are an unnerving combination of the feminine and the mechanical (that has to be taken in context).

But is all that fair?
I think communication and empathy are considered to be femanine qualities — rightly or wrongly — and I think Western culture at least can be said to have become more feminine in this sense.

To a much smaller degree, I think we are seeing the hive mind at work right now with social media and "equality." People want the right to "feel comfortable" even at the expense of the liberty of others, and they use social media to coordinate and "present" their message like never before. The hive mind could be quite oppressive to some and quite comforting to others.

I think the borg do live among us... I think most all of us are more hivemindish than we might believe.

If the transition to transhumanism is gradual — but who knows — I think the hive mind will emerge with built in checks and balances.

I personally have no interest in being directly connected to the mind of any other person. Perhaps ill need to assimilated? In order to upgrade to iCyberBrain 5.1, mental independence won't be an option. Scary.

Question III is whether our finitude itself and our knowledge of our own mortality is a driver and structuring force of our intellect? And without this force what would we, in time, become ?

4. Could it then be that the platforms we have actually aren't shaky, flaky error accident and disease prone but rather - at the species level - are inexpensive, composed of widely available materials, robust, adaptive, deeply interconnected and highly optimized? After all we aren't Natures first crack at Genus Homo and even if we discount all notions of teleology in evolution and count only chance and necessity I think we should respect the effects of deep time over a complex environment - when attempting to improve on or simulate those processes.

And if so, as we move forward should we see these qualities as classics, core components - essential to maintain and even improve on if possible? The goal being to become more human rather than less.
As our merging with our technology excellerates, I think there will be many unpredicatable results. There will be many failures. There may be one failure too many; a failure or combination of failures that result in the extinction of humans or worse: the destruction of Life or of the earth itself.

Maybe some instance of new tech will result in a transhuman who is less then human or lacking conscious because of some missing ingredient — empathy, emotion, or some unknown quantum connection. We might recognize the failure and avoid it moving forward — and learn a bit about what makes us human in the process — or the resulting entity will destroy us all.

Of course, these are potential futures regardless of transhumanism.

However @mike you have a different intuition and I think that's a minority report on our species - an undercurrent that evolves genetically and socially - a kind of potential to go another way should the environment change. (Note for engineers: that kind of blind foresight has to be a part of anything that wants to survive ) ... lots of people think the way you do and I think always have.
You seem to believe that a move to transhumanism and/or a hivemind would result in a decrease in adaptibility. Is that accurate?

Im not sure thats the case. Im probably missing something. Yes, immortal transhumans would no longer need to replicate and thus would no longer have the benefit of DNA recombination or DNA mutation — however, they could do these things if they chose, mind you — but they would have other, perhaps more robust, ways to adapt.

Is it conceivable that many or all transhumans might succomb to a powerful, non-organic virus? Of course. However, the fact that we here in this discussion are aware of this leads me to believe they would be aware of this as well. Yes, transhumans would be vulnerable to viruses and hackers, etc. In this regard, diversity will always have a place.

On the other hand, you've pointed out yourself how adaptable hiveminds such as ants have been here on Earth.

There's no VS there ... I think I was wrong on that.
I looked back over this thread but havent been able to determine what VS means. Could someone explain?
 
There will be early adopters, late adopter, and luddites.

Cybrogs and prosthetics will indeed be the way to go. People will use them for all the same reasons we use them today:

Plastic surgery, glasses, cognitive enhancing medications, video games for pleasure, and social media to stay informed of the social doings of others.

Transhumanist technologies will provide the same functions but be more integrated with our bodies. They will sell themselves to a large portion of the human population.


Have you seen what the Major from Ghost in the Shell looks like? Sold.


I think communication and empathy are considered to be femanine qualities — rightly or wrongly — and I think Western culture at least can be said to have become more feminine in this sense.

To a much smaller degree, I think we are seeing the hive mind at work right now with social media and "equality." People want the right to "feel comfortable" even at the expense of the liberty of others, and they use social media to coordinate and "present" their message like never before. The hive mind could be quite oppressive to some and quite comforting to others.

I think the borg do live among us... I think most all of us are more hivemindish than we might believe.

If the transition to transhumanism is gradual — but who knows — I think the hive mind will emerge with built in checks and balances.

I personally have no interest in being directly connected to the mind of any other person. Perhaps ill need to assimilated? In order to upgrade to iCyberBrain 5.1, mental independence won't be an option. Scary.


As our merging with our technology excellerates, I think there will be many unpredicatable results. There will be many failures. There may be one failure too many; a failure or combination of failures that result in the extinction of humans or worse: the destruction of Life or of the earth itself.

Maybe some instance of new tech will result in a transhuman who is less then human or lacking conscious because of some missing ingredient — empathy, emotion, or some unknown quantum connection. We might recognize the failure and avoid it moving forward — and learn a bit about what makes us human in the process — or the resulting entity will destroy us all.

Of course, these are potential futures regardless of transhumanism.


You seem to believe that a move to transhumanism and/or a hivemind would result in a decrease in adaptibility. Is that accurate?

Im not sure thats the case. Im probably missing something. Yes, immortal transhumans would no longer need to replicate and thus would no longer have the benefit of DNA recombination or DNA mutation — however, they could do these things if they chose, mind you — but they would have other, perhaps more robust, ways to adapt.

Is it conceivable that many or all transhumans might succomb to a powerful, non-organic virus? Of course. However, the fact that we here in this discussion are aware of this leads me to believe they would be aware of this as well. Yes, transhumans would be vulnerable to viruses and hackers, etc. In this regard, diversity will always have a place.

On the other hand, you've pointed out yourself how adaptable hiveminds such as ants have been here on Earth.


I looked back over this thread but havent been able to determine what VS means. Could someone explain?

VS = "versus" ... from the Latin ... therefore:

You seem to believe that a move to transhumanism and/or a hivemind would result in a decrease in adaptibility. Is that accurate?

No
 
As ive said my problem with the Cybermen is not in the motive, but the means.



For the sake of the plot (making them monsters) the mindware is the dominant protocol the mind file suppressed.
This makes them seem single minded and driven, which defeats the purpose of upgrade imo. The idea is to preserve the Mindfiles.

The mindware should be in the background like the autonomic protocols we currently use to keep the heart beating, lungs breating etc etc.

Mindware will run in the background running parity checks on the mindfile, keeping links with the various datanets active, driving the self repair protocols etc etc.

The problem with the cybermen is the mindwares survival programming is over the top, becoming the overiding driver behind the entity.

As Matt SMith played him - the Doctor was very human, intuitive, zany and crazy like a fox ... absent minded, more right than "left" brained ... and he has two hearts ... very likable ... !

havent got to the Cybermen episode yet
 
There will be early adopters, late adopter, and luddites.

Cybrogs and prosthetics will indeed be the way to go. People will use them for all the same reasons we use them today:

Plastic surgery, glasses, cognitive enhancing medications, video games for pleasure, and social media to stay informed of the social doings of others.

Transhumanist technologies will provide the same functions but be more integrated with our bodies. They will sell themselves to a large portion of the human population.


Have you seen what the Major from Ghost in the Shell looks like? Sold.


I think communication and empathy are considered to be femanine qualities — rightly or wrongly — and I think Western culture at least can be said to have become more feminine in this sense.

To a much smaller degree, I think we are seeing the hive mind at work right now with social media and "equality." People want the right to "feel comfortable" even at the expense of the liberty of others, and they use social media to coordinate and "present" their message like never before. The hive mind could be quite oppressive to some and quite comforting to others.

I think the borg do live among us... I think most all of us are more hivemindish than we might believe.

If the transition to transhumanism is gradual — but who knows — I think the hive mind will emerge with built in checks and balances.

I personally have no interest in being directly connected to the mind of any other person. Perhaps ill need to assimilated? In order to upgrade to iCyberBrain 5.1, mental independence won't be an option. Scary.


As our merging with our technology excellerates, I think there will be many unpredicatable results. There will be many failures. There may be one failure too many; a failure or combination of failures that result in the extinction of humans or worse: the destruction of Life or of the earth itself.

Maybe some instance of new tech will result in a transhuman who is less then human or lacking conscious because of some missing ingredient — empathy, emotion, or some unknown quantum connection. We might recognize the failure and avoid it moving forward — and learn a bit about what makes us human in the process — or the resulting entity will destroy us all.

Of course, these are potential futures regardless of transhumanism.


You seem to believe that a move to transhumanism and/or a hivemind would result in a decrease in adaptibility. Is that accurate?

Im not sure thats the case. Im probably missing something. Yes, immortal transhumans would no longer need to replicate and thus would no longer have the benefit of DNA recombination or DNA mutation — however, they could do these things if they chose, mind you — but they would have other, perhaps more robust, ways to adapt.

Is it conceivable that many or all transhumans might succomb to a powerful, non-organic virus? Of course. However, the fact that we here in this discussion are aware of this leads me to believe they would be aware of this as well. Yes, transhumans would be vulnerable to viruses and hackers, etc. In this regard, diversity will always have a place.

On the other hand, you've pointed out yourself how adaptable hiveminds such as ants have been here on Earth.


I looked back over this thread but havent been able to determine what VS means. Could someone explain?

Should we start another thread?
 
[QUOTE]This mindfile would be run on "mindware," a kind of software for consciousness.




Mike, can you provide the provenance of the terms 'mindware' and 'mindfile', and the source of the quotation you inserted, which I've highlighted in blue? If you have links to a site or sites where these terms originate and are defined, that would be helpful. Thanks.[/QUOTE]


'Mind Uploading' & Digital Immortality May Be Reality By 2045, Futurists Say



The conference took a surreal turn when Martine Rothblatt — a lawyer, author and entrepreneur, and CEO of biotech company United Therapeutics Corp. — took the stage. Even the title of Rothblatt's talk was provocative: "The Purpose of Biotechnology is the End of Death."
Rothblatt introduced the concept of "mindclones" — digital versions of humans that can live forever. She described how the mind clones are created from a "mindfile," a sort of online repository of our personalities, which she argued humans already have (in the form of Facebook, for example). This mindfile would be run on "mindware," a kind of software for consciousness. "The first company that develops mindware will have [as much success as] a thousand Googles," Rothblatt said.
But would such a mindclone be alive? Rothblatt thinks so. She cited one definition of life as a self-replicating code that maintains itself against disorder. Some critics have shunned what Rothblatt called "spooky Cartesian dualism," arguing that the mind must be embedded in biology. On the contrary, software and hardware are as good as wet ware, or biological materials, she argued.
 
. . . I think the hive mind will emerge with built in checks and balances.

What kinds of 'checks and balances'? How does a 'hive mind' enable thinking, especially thinking against the grain --> supporting dialogue and dialectic and thus change?


Maybe some instance of new tech will result in a transhuman who is less then human or lacking conscious because of some missing ingredient — empathy, emotion, or some unknown quantum connection. We might recognize the failure and avoid it moving forward — and learn a bit about what makes us human in the process — or the resulting entity will destroy us all.

Your take on all this seems to be inconsistent with the concept of 'the Singularity' as described by Kurzweil and his predecessors such as Vinge.


You seem to believe that a move to transhumanism and/or a hivemind would result in a decrease in adaptibility. Is that accurate?

You addressed that question to Steve, but I would also like to respond to it. What would a totalized hive mind operating on an artificial computer substrate be able to 'adapt to'? Apparently not to changing conditions in the physical, natural world since, as Tononi and Koch have also now recognized, a computer intelligence would be capable of almost no experience of the world.


Im not sure thats the case. Im probably missing something. Yes, immortal transhumans would no longer need to replicate and thus would no longer have the benefit of DNA recombination or DNA mutation — however, they could do these things if they chose, mind you — but they would have other, perhaps more robust, ways to adapt.

Are you postulating that 'transhumans' would just plug in to the superior 'hive mind' at times, for one reason or another, but also maintain their biological substrates and continue to feel and think independently, live in and procreate within nature, and maintain a stake in the actualities of lived reality on the planet shared with other humans and animals? This doesn't sound like what Kurzweil and Mike have been talking about. Also what "other, perhaps more robust, ways to adapt" do you anticipate for all-in members of the hive mind?
 
Back
Top