/sci/ - Science & Math

Posthumanism is the future of humanity

Inhumanism is the future of humanity.

>>11050619
I can't wait for the catgirls!

>>11050619
>Would you say that transhumanism is the future of humanity?
Sure, but we won't have superintelligence in 2045, add 2105 is a more reasonable date.

fuck deathists

>>11052233
I would say 2300, unless we're lucky enough to have another von Neumann or two.

>>11054156
Pisses me off that life extension is still a taboo and severely underfunded. Cryonics, in particular.

>>11050619
>Would you say that transhumanism is the future of humanity?
I think it's more likely that genetics engineering will converge faster than AI/robotics.

>>11054169
>I would say 2300, unless we're lucky enough to have another von Neumann or two.
Well, with genetic engineering that is possible. Imagine a thousand Neumanns.

>>11054273
Yeah, that's what I imagine will happen first, rather than us mortals blindly pushing the boundaries of moore's law.

>>11054156
>>11054169
Both of you are going to die in a few decades on the outside. Neither of you will be among the Elect. Happily, the Elect themselves will remain helplessly dependent on a very precise supply chain, security who grow increasingly resentful as the decades pass...

The "chad" is not what will actually happen to you, personally-and since not to you, personally, it's meaningless. What greater cuckold is there than the scientist, or the parent, who works to build a better world which /he himself will not enjoy/? Certainly not the nihilist, who accurately perceives things-all instinctive revulsion to the contrary.

The man who plants a tree whose shade he knows he will never rest in, is not therefore wise. Taken to its logical conclusion, the preferable end is human extinction as soon as possible, and as soon as possible, but even if not, nature will take its course.

>>11054169
>>11054156
I have my doubts about cyronic because I think the brain must be stored into nanostasis to be able to be awakened without damage. More interesting is the ongoing gene treatments that may offer life extension. The trial that rejuvenated 9 men by 2.5 years is rather well known, but things like this : https://www.cell.com/cell/fulltext/S0092-8674(16)31664-6?_returnURL=http%3A%2F%2Flinkinghub.elsevier.com%2Fretrieve%2Fpii%2FS0092867416316646%3Fshowall%3Dtrue , in which a adult mouse life was extended by 30% is far more interesting. Such tech is not that costly and probably avaible in 15 years.

>>11054320
I don't disagree, anon. That is my plan B if anti-aging doesn't take off.

>>11054280
The genetic engineering doesn't disclose artificial intelligence, nanomachines or cybernetica. I think it will more accelerate such developments. Musk's Neuralink also seems promising.

>>11054320
Damn I am happy I decided to visit this board right now. Going to keep looking around.

>>11050619
>Would you say that transhumanism is the future of humanity?
No. There's no reason to think why anything human will be worth keeping instead of replacing it with machine.

>>11054332
Yeah, that is what I was implying. Also a "low hanging fruit" might be eliminating sleep. Instant 30%+ extension.

>>11054344
Transhumanism was always meant to be a transitory age until the posthuman. But I also think both processes will be quite varied and gradual. Posthumans will also carry on human civilisation, its reason and its thoughts. But surely enough they will diverge massively especially the farther we go into the future.

>>11054355
>Posthumans will also carry on human civilisation, its reason and its thoughts
Nope. Nothing human will be worth keeping.

>>11054364
The fundamental laws of math, physics and logic will remain. Many philosophical concepts will worry posthumans even in a billion years, posthuman will probably not discard baseline/advanced intelligence because at first it's in their world in which they must operate. A Skynet is unlikely as cooperation is far more productive. From that they will grow a thousand fold. Some baseline/advanced intelligences won't choose to be part of a superintellige civilisation and leave, and these people will feel that nothing human was kept. But that's more that humans kept nothing from its amphibian ancestors. Maybe even more if we take autosentience because then even the core can be revised. No posthumanity or humanity will exist but individuals each being their own lifeform. That will only occur in centuries or millennias.

>>11054395
>The fundamental laws of math, physics and logic will remain
Those aren't human.
>Many philosophical concepts will worry posthumans even in a billion
There will be no concept of "worry". Just objects that have superior capability of self-reproduction than any carbon-based lifeform.

>>11054406
Creative lifeforms beats uncreative ones. The future doesn't belong to non-sapient intelligence but to total self-aware entities.

>>11054411
As long as that self-awareness doesn't supress impetus for self-reproduction.

>>11050619
Transhumanism would be the death of humanity. Also the death of morality. What makes you think that humans, the current flawed individuals, could create artificial systems that do not have their biases? But with the use of technology, the flaws of humanity would be extrapolated out into a self "improving" system, that is really just refining itself to come closer and closer to the perfection of whatever bias or flaw has arisen as the dominant one. Ultimately, humans putting their fate in uncaring technology will turn into a perverse Darwinian hell, assuming you don't already think the universe is a perverse Darwinian hell as it is. It certainly won't improve the situation.

Regarding brain-computer interfaces, implanted chips and control mechanisms. Those things can hacked and controlled. You are utilising a method by which a backdoor into your very being as a person is introduced. Oh no, there's been a data leak, now your entire personality is controlled remotely, without you even knowing it, as the hack has inbuilt programs to direct your attention away from the change.

It's just nightmares all the way down.

Luckily Jesus is coming to end the world before then :)

>>11054475

>>11050619
In the sense that it's inevitable? Maybe. In the sense it's desirable? Absolutely. You mention cameras and ID -- things that are associated with state/corporate oppression -- but consider everything else it can open up: immortality, space-adapted bodies, digital paradises, post-scarcity and the means to achieve independence for everyone. Even if the elite 'win', infighting will inevitably occur and produce new hierarchies and thus a new underdog only now with the technology. As for BCI vs implants, why not both? As long as they are FOSS/H, I'll gladly take whatever I can as I await the day uploading is possible and be free of the whole pesky physical existence thing. Longer term, I'm with >>11050678 and >>11050681.

>>11050619
>Would you say that transhumanism is the future of humanity? Would you alter your body by placing cameras on your eyes, a implanted identification device or credit card? Or would you wait for a brain-computer interface?
Probably, many elements play to it favour. Health, economic and political structures work towards it. Many great powers like Silicon Valley, China and other tech giant generally support it, indirectly or directly. Once in 15 years when the first transhuman tech gets avaible, societies using it will outpace others who don't. Comparable to the industrial revolution.
Not a fan of body hackers, no practical purpose behind it.

B