Humans must merge with machines or become irrelevant in AI age

[Fife]

Let's say I essentially agree with both that and what Fukuyama's position was stated as in the Bostrom link.

Fukuyama’s objection is that the defense of equal legal and political rights is incompatible with embracing human enhancement: “Underlying this idea of the equality of rights is the belief that we all possess a human essence that dwarfs manifest differences in skin color, beauty, and even intelligence. This essence, and the view that individuals therefore have inherent value, is at the heart of political liberalism. But modifying that essence is the core of the transhumanist project.”

His argument thus depends on three assumptions: (1) there is a unique “human essence”; (2) only those individuals who have this mysterious essence can have intrinsic value and deserve equal rights; and (3) the enhancements that transhumanists advocate would eliminate this essence. From this, he infers that the transhumanist project would destroy the basis of equal rights.

I'm not for freezing myself, or loading myself onto a mainframe, at least not today. Given that, is AI completely separate from transhumanism?

[Speaker to Animals]

AI is separate from transhumanism.

[Speaker to Animals]

Transhumanism is basically "leftism" as it has existed since the Athenian demos fulfilled in all its desires and dreams. It's like taking sophistry and applying it to human nature rather than just human language and politics.

[Speaker to Animals]

Conversely, the project of AI is more like the dreams of the so-called "right" fulfilled. You can have perfect government free from human defects. You could produce what you want through nanofarming, etc.

Personally, I am not sure these things can coexist very easily. At first it will seem so, but eventually I think the beasties the transhumanists become will go off into the darkness on their own and the humans who live with AI will settle down.

[C-Mag]

An interview with Nicholas Carr, author Utopia is Creepy
https://www.amazon.com/Utopia-Creepy-Pr ... 0393254542
Carr argues that Silicon Valley is pushing us towards their vision of a Utopia that is a non-physical world, a world without conflicts, a world where man becomes robotic and sterile.


The Podcast
http://www.artofmanliness.com/2017/02/0 ... ia-creepy/

[adwinistrator]

Musk explained what he meant by saying that computers can communicate at "a trillion bits per second", while humans, whose main communication method is typing with their fingers via a mobile device, can do about 10 bits per second.

In an age when AI threatens to become widespread, humans would be useless, so there's a need to merge with machines, according to Musk.

"Some high bandwidth interface to the brain will be something that helps achieve a symbiosis between human and machine intelligence and maybe solves the control problem and the usefulness problem," Musk explained.

The technologists proposal would see a new layer of a brain able to access information quickly and tap into artificial intelligence. It's not the first time Musk has spoken about the need for humans to evolve, but it's a constant theme of his talks on how society can deal with the disruptive threat of AI.

To get a clear view of what he and others are saying, you have to get past the headline.

The article, and Elon Musk, basically state: as AI gets better, it will be able to outperform humans in a variety of analytical and system-related tasks. In order to stay competitive with this possibility, technologists should research new ways to interface technology with the human brain, to enhance the unique abilities of the mind that AI cannot (yet) replicate.

Instead of looking at this as "turn your brain into an AI robot", consider an external hard drive for all the things you want to remember, all the classes you've taken in school, all the lectures and debates you've listened to. A way to have those "memories", or data points collected from those experiences, at your recall.

A computer will always be better at memory storage and recall, but could an incredibly creative person produce even better output with enhanced memory and recall? A painter who can close their eyes and see that perfect sunset, smell the air, and hear the breeze? Not just their imperfect and malleable memory of that moment, but the exact sensory data for it.

Obviously, the risks with computer-brain interfaces are tremendous, and I would never think it wise to have an interface technology be externally accessible (100% air gap, no networking). There are a lot of potential benefits though... Consider how a pacemaker helps to keep a heart beating regularly. If a device could provide a replacement for the mental facilities lost from Alzheimer's, and there is no better cure, shouldn't people be able to utilize it if they choose?

Lots of grey area, debatable ethics, and interesting scenarios.

[KerningChameleon]

I was born with a genetic disorder called Marfan's Syndrome. By genetic disorder standards, it's not that bad compared to say multiple sclerosis or something. But I still have tears in the connective tissue under both my knees, so if I overextend them or engage in heavy exercise or manual labor or I could risk ripping those tissues apart completely and become both incapable of walking and live in excruciating pain for the rest of my life because they wouldn't ever heal. I'm also marked for death some time in my 50s-60s since Marfan's patients have a high risk for Aortic Dissection, and there's no really much modern medical science, for all it's wonders, can currently do about it. My oldest uncle died of complications from a surgery to address an aortic dissection several years ago, and I have strong evidence my paternal grandfather died from the same and was simply misdiagnosed as a heart attack. Cause that's the other thing, Marfan's Syndrome, by cruel twist of fate, is a dominant gene, so once we knew we discovered a frighteningly large number of people in my people have it. Were I to have biological children, they would have a high risk of inheriting the disorder as well. It's also had some other "fun" side effects for me, like being born without a sense of smell.

If I could make that all go away with genetic rewriting or cutting out my brain and sticking it in a robot jar? You bet your ass I'd do it in a heartbeat. Call it contempt for the flesh if you want, but I see the human body as a weak, flawed, extremely fragile thing. If we have the capability improve it or obsolete it with something much hardier and longer lived, I believe we should pursue such lines of research with all haste. To willingly not do so would be morally repugnant, from my point of view.

[Okeefenokee]

So...how do we stop it?

Same way the gorillas stopped us.

clever, but I disagree.

[JohnDonne]

Machine consciousness is kind of like our version of flying cars, they keep saying it's going to happen, but it's not like we're going to stumble on the answer to the most complex machine in the universe by accident. We have to understand the brain and consciousness to recreate those effects in a machine, and we're not even close. See John Searle's Chinese room.

[Ex-California]

Transhumanism is going to be the greatest threat to our species we ever faced, with nothing even remotely near it in terms of impact and negative consequences.

Consider how sophistry has been used by the degeneracy we now call the "left" for thousands of years. If reality doesn't comport to what they want, they try to redefine words to make people believe things that are untrue, or to manipulate people into agreeing to something because those people are operating under different definitions of words. Scholars have long argued that the corruption of language has been the greatest threat to western civilization.

But with transhumanism, they don't have to corrupt the language. They can corrupt nature. For instance, now if you refuse to believe that Bruce Jenner can somehow magically become a woman, they will try to shame you into maintaining their sophistic worldview where they all just pretend he is a woman regardless of objective truth. But with transhumanism, they can probably actually convert a person to another sex. Whatever batshit self-image they want to adhere to they will be able to make into a reality. The gender-bending, animal-kin bullshit we see today is entirely pedestrian compared to what we will see when those floodgates open.

I got into an hours long argument on the Dan Carlin Facebook page over that tranny MMA fighter. These people refuse to accept that there is more to being a woman or a man than a person just *thinking* they are a woman or man