/sci/ - Science & Math

Yes you should be. After the AI takeover, there won't be need for humans.

>>11370302
and why should we be afraid of not being human, brainlet?

>>11370323
We are humans, unfortunately even with all informations from your brain, every cell examined and 3D model, you won't have any information of what happens to that model.

No, and may fate rid me of this decaying flesh

>>11370339
>We are humans
You don't say? Again, why should we be afraid of being NOT human?

>>11370375
Because being human is what made us successful so far.
Transhumanism is just snake oil.

>>11370391
Humans are a very temporary step in evolution. We aren't even close to what it's possible to be.

>>11370391
>Because being human is what made us successful

>>11370256
>than what would be the point of humanity?

What does this even mean? What the fuck is a “point”?

> Of having human bodies?

Why have a human body when you could have a better one? Seems silly.

>>11370391
>Because being human is what made us successful so far.

In a sense, but our qualities that make us successful can be improved even further. That’s like blaming the success of European empires on gunpowder rifles and saying there’s no reason for them to upgrade to tanks and machineguns.

>>11370613
>Why have a human body when you could have a better one? Seems silly.
You won't have a better one. You will die like billions before you.

>>11370391

>>11370391
>Cars will never exist. People will always ride horses because horses are what made us successful so far.
t. you from the 1800s

>>11370637
>You won't have a better one.

Prove it.

>>11370256
But when all people have become useless, self-prop systems will find no advantage in taking care of anyone. The techies themselves insist that machines will soon surpass humans in intelligence. When that happens, people will be superfluous and natural selection will favor systems that eliminate them-if not abruptly, then in a series of stages so that the risk of rebellion will be minimized.

Even though the technological world-system still needs large numbers of people for the present, there are now more superfluous humans than there have been in the past because technology has replaced people in many jobs and is making inroads even into occupations formerly thought to require human intelligence. Consequently, under the pressure of economic competition, the world's dominant self-prop systems are already allowing a certain degree of callousness to creep into their treatment of superfluous individuals. In the United States and Europe, pensions and other benefits for retired, disabled, unemployed, and other unproductive persons are being substantially reduced; at least in the U. S., poverty is increasing; and these facts may well indicate the general trend of the future, though there will doubtless be ups and downs.

>>11370650
It's important to understand that in order to make people superfluous, machines will not have to surpass them in general intelligence but only in certain specialized kinds of intelligence. For example, the machines will not have to create or understand art, music, or literature, they will not need the ability to carry on an intelligent, non-technical conversation (the "Turing test"), they will not have to exercise tact or understand human nature, because these skills will have no application if humans are to be eliminated anyway. To make humans superfluous, the machines will only need to outperform them in making the technical decisions that have to be made for the purpose of promoting the short-term survival and propagation of the dominant self-prop systems. So, even without going as far as the techies themselves do in assuming intelligence on the part of future machines, we still have to conclude that humans will become obsolete. Immortality in the form (i)-the indefinite preservation of the human body as it exits today-is highly improbable.

>>11370650
>The guy who spams terrorist copy-pasta is back

>>11370653
>NOOOOOOOO BOMBER MAN BAD

>>11370661
>You think terrorism is bad? Haha lol

Cringe.

>>11370670
>him being a terrorist automatically makes him wrong about technology

>>11370744
>No dude this terrorist is right unlike those other terrorists

Cringe.
Do your parents know you support terrorism, and like the idea of high infant mortality rates?

>>11370391
>not wanting to give you body away to a machine that is superior in every way to you because of your jeebus /pol/tard anti-semitic beliefs
Fuck off