Press J to jump to the feed. Press question mark to learn the rest of the keyboard shortcuts
17

I want to see cheap, abundant stem cell therapy. Stem cells can cure deafness, blindness, diabetes, it can make quadriplegics be able to move again, it can make paraplegics walk again, it can cure infertility, regrow teeth and hair, may be able to fight HIV/AIDS, etc. Cells from Hydra and Naked Mole Rats can prevent aging and cancer. There's an abundance of possibilities that can be accomplished in ten to thirty or forty years.

17
20 comments
6

Just your guess. Also, overpopulation is a problem unless we completely change our species.

6
5 comments
3

Hey peeps- I'm really interested in extropy and extropianism. Anyone have any resources/links/blogs/videos I can look to?

Best.

3
5 comments
4

The thing is if you upload to a computer you are going to need to pay for your electricity bill:

Assuming about 1000 PFlops to run a human brain in a computer and using the Summit 15 MW 200 Pflops super computer as our example.

It would take 5 Summit supercomputers @200 Pflops to reach the 1000 Pflops needed.

So thats 5 x 15 MW = 75 MW of power or 75 MW hours.

At 10c a KWh or $100 per MWh gives us $7,500 per hour to run our brain simulation.

So how long could you afford to run your brain in simulation and could you afford the additional processing power to live in a simulated world?

Or would uploaded transhumans just have to work very hard and very fast to keep their light on?

Note: A Single Summit supercomputer costs around $101m so 5 would set you back $505m and you will want to upgrade every couple of years to boost your brain power...

4
36 comments
21

Neuroscience and gerontology are definitely some of the more important ones, what else is prominent? What kinds of degrees do the primary researchers of this topic hold?

Just curious, any answers are welcome

21
16 comments
20

Would religions:

  1. Evolve and Adapt to the new technology, setting up their own virtual heavens?
  2. Ban their worshippers from uploading?
  3. Fight against the technology?
  4. Collapse as their power/hold on people dwindles?

Or something completely different?

20
33 comments
5

I think that, at the root, this is just based on personal philosophies.

Let's just define mind uploading as: somehow uploading all the information in your brain to a computer that can accurately emulate a human brain, thus making a non-biological replica of you (this point in itself can get complicated, ex. how do we deal with sensory deprivation?, but that's an entirely different story).

One point brought up is how we can't scan the brain without destroying it in the process, but let's imagine that we can. If that's the case, there are now two completely individual minds: the one on the computer, and the original biological mind which the computer mind is a copy of.

The original mind cannot experience whatever the computer mind is feeling, and the computer mind cannot experience what the original mind is feeling. It's as simple as that. The original mind will eventually die because it is biological, and the computer mind will (theoretically) be immortal.

Some people argue that since the original mind eventually dies, mind uploading should not count as immortality.

Other people argue that the fact that there exists another identical copy of the original mind means that, in essence, the original mind never dies.

Hopefully you can see that this goes deep into personal philosophies, and there isn't necessarily a correct answer.

That's what I think, I'd love to hear your guys' opinions on the topic.

5
26 comments
0

 I think we're all here because we all somehow believe in the possibility of immortality in the virtual world, right? Experts say that the first possible thing that can be done is to transfer personal memories into virtual space. This has two ways of doing. One is what is known as "transhumanism" or mind uploading wherein the memories stored in a human's mind are copied and stored as a computer code. The other is uploading of human's life experiences using recording on devices which are capable of producing a virtual copy.

This transition is believed to be able to lead humans into becoming a virtual form of that individual which then leads to the possibility of not having to experience death. Why not? I'm only 30 and I still have a lot of plans in my life. If I can have more time in the virtual world to do all of those plans, I'll go for it.

https://i.redd.it/djy0lpodapa11.jpg

0
34 comments
10

Is there a way we could, for example, do the thinking of one years in just one hour ?

Is it possible to "speed up" our brainand change our preception of time?

10
10 comments
2

Has anyone thought of how the two seemingly polar opposite ideas such as the UN's precautionary principle and Max Mores Proactionary principle is going to shape our future? I believe these two ideologies are going to exhibit some interesting debates in the future. Will we see the emergence of two distinctive cultures or even civilizations.

The creative-transgression is going to be epic.

2
7 comments
37

I sure do hope there will ultimately be multiple options for achieving immortality. Mind uploading seems like a bad idea considering solar flares and continuity of consciousness. Also hackers and government surveillance.

IMO the best option might be to become a cyborg with various augmentations such as anti-aging enzymes.

37
129 comments
12

Let's say the human body has been replaced with a programmable and customizable android body. What does it look like? (Barring anything like weapons or physical augmentations, purely in a cosmetic sense). I'd probably want a cyborg body that can change to fit multiple faucets of my personality, hot swapping different attributes

12
16 comments
13

"At the social organization level, imagine a war between a society in which people have systematically invested their hopes in cryonics and people who are hoping in the resurrection of the dead (I realize the groups would overlap in the most likely scenarios, but for simplicity in thinking of the social effects of widespread investment in cryonics imagine one society 100 percent one way and one 100 percent the other), who is going to be more afraid of being blown to bits? (And suppose both groups accept life extension medicine.) Also, in one system the "resurrection" depends on technology being maintained by people other than you who you have little control over and might be of bad moral character or who might embrace a philosophy at odds with cryonics or which simply does not prioritize it sufficiently to preserve your frozen body, in the other it depends on one's spiritual state and relationship to the first Good, a cryonics society is likely to get conquered by people with a different life philosophy."

13
22 comments
31

Say Ray Kurzweil is right and we can upload our minds within 30 years and be immortal. Our existence would be strictly digital.

Considering most people live for worldly pleasures (getting a tan, having sex, eating good food) what would people have to get excited about and live for without a body to pamper? Does the simple existence of the consciousness offer enough substance to have a fulfilling "life"?

I'm assuming certain character traits would be required to stay sane and get the most out of such an environment. High creativity and not being nostalgic two of them.

31
72 comments
0

It would be optimal, I would think, if one wanted to transport to the future, they would be best to cryogenically freeze before they die.

The choice would be easy, for say someone, who has actually pondered their immortality and transhumanism, and was suddenly diagnosed with, say, a cancer, where you have 3 years to live, or the choice to poison your entire body heavily with chemo, and then the rest of your systems suffer from the poisoning, leaving your body in a weakened,but alive state.

I would hop over to the cryo lab, (if legal), and freeze over in my sleep.

It would be like suicide, (which many cancer victims partake in, on a more definite level, or lose faith, and give up fighting), but suicide with hope.

Furthermore, I would not have to worry about the spectre of cancerous death hanging over my head, nor would I have to go through the pain of chemo. I'd simply go to sleep, with the possibility of waking in the future when treatment is 1) more likely to succeed, and 2) less harmful to the body or even 3) when brains are simply uploaded to the immortal machine.

But, by this field of logic, I should just freeze right now, as natural death is hanging over my head, and why freeze a body that might be 60 or 70, and with cancer, instead of freezing this good body, with no known health problems, right now, to re-invigorate in the future.

The thought of course is... LARP. If I was serious, if I seriously believed, (like Christians claim to believe in a heaven), I would freeze myself right now. So clearly, I have reservations about the future technology, about being the guinea pig. It's another question of... "who goes first?"

0
3 comments
Community Details

24.8k

Subscribers

15

Online

Create Post
r/transhumanism Rules
1.
Be excellent to each other.
Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.