Transhumanism: What's your take on it?

[Meryuma]

I'm referring to that history has been a linear story of progress culminating in modern industrial society and that more intensive industry = more prosperous/efficient/whatever.

Again, we've had this discussion before. I personally became interested in the philosophy with the interest that it could be used to attain a post-industrial society. Most transhumanists I have seen do display a general level of soicial and ecological consciousness that even if they don't necessary believe we need to transcend industrialism, we must at least modify it to be more sustainable than it currently is. If people accepted a strictly techno-utopian and bright green ecological outlook with transhumanism, then yes, it would be doomed to lead to devastation, but simply as an ideology that maintains the importance of technology along with other methods of altering society, it can be a perfectly sound ideology.

I think many technologies should be preserved but I don't know if transhumanism could be attained without destructive industry. I probably should've stated that that was kind of a generalization (I have talked to some green transhumanists and even an anti-civ transhumanist, which I'd like to hear more details about) but I see the movement's roots and many of its adherents as being pro-industrial and sometimes disdainful of the biosphere. Sorry if I started a redundant/annoying debate, I'm just kinda grumpy about transhumanism because of singularitarians, The Emerald Legion, and shit like this (also I think the last time we discussed this was a year or two ago). It's kinda like how there are cool and anti-authoritarian groups within the Abrahamic religions but much within the texts is authoritarian; there are transhumanists who reject techno-utopianism and a modernist view of progress but that's the framework from which the movement spread.

Again, we've had this discussion before. I personally became interested in the philosophy with the interest that it could be used to attain a post-industrial society. Most transhumanists I have seen do display a general level of soicial and ecological consciousness that even if they don't necessary believe we need to transcend industrialism, we must at least modify it to be more sustainable than it currently is. If people accepted a strictly techno-utopian and bright green ecological outlook with transhumanism, then yes, it would be doomed to lead to devastation, but simply as an ideology that maintains the importance of technology along with other methods of altering society, it can be a perfectly sound ideology.

Basically, the divide between you two is the divide between "garden" greens and "wilderness" greens. Social vs deep ecology.

We're pretty close politically, I'm just more in the doomer camp than she is.

[Uieurnthlaal]

Transhumanism is inevitable. We've been using technology to enhance and change our lives since we had the cognitive ability to realise banging rocks together might yield something useful.

Think about, most of us ware watches 24/7, people might as well have their phones surgically implanted given the amount of time they use them, and bionic medical implants just keep getting more advanced.

I embrace it fully. I don't think a purely biological body is necessary to maintain humanity. All the matter's is what is in your head. It's all information. Everything you feel is information begin processed by your brain. I don't see what would be lost If we merged with technology fully, becoming post physical if you will.

And consider this, the internet already allows us to interact as something of a collective mind (one that admittedly wouldn't be allowed anything sharper than a spherical sponge given some of the people on it). Having our minds merged with a super computer, the end result of transhumanism in my view, would simply be the natural evolution of this.

I couldn't have said it better. (Actually I did, but no one paid attention to it.)
In any case, I fully agree with you about that. But how can you be sure that only the brain matters? Sure, its the root of all thought, and the place of consciousness, but how can you be sure that electronically unreplicatble chemical signals won't play a part in consciousness?

[Starkindler]

Transhumanism is inevitable. We've been using technology to enhance and change our lives since we had the cognitive ability to realise banging rocks together might yield something useful.

Think about, most of us ware watches 24/7, people might as well have their phones surgically implanted given the amount of time they use them, and bionic medical implants just keep getting more advanced.

I embrace it fully. I don't think a purely biological body is necessary to maintain humanity. All the matter's is what is in your head. It's all information. Everything you feel is information begin processed by your brain. I don't see what would be lost If we merged with technology fully, becoming post physical if you will.

And consider this, the internet already allows us to interact as something of a collective mind (one that admittedly wouldn't be allowed anything sharper than a spherical sponge given some of the people on it). Having our minds merged with a super computer, the end result of transhumanism in my view, would simply be the natural evolution of this.

Code: Select all

We are the Borg. Lower your shields and surrender your ship. We will add your biological and technological distinctiveness to our own. Your culture will adapt to service us. Resistance is voltage divided by current.

Memes aside, I myself am for transhumanism. The first implications would be to give back faulty organs, as in produce new lungs, hearts, limbs, eyes and ears for those who lost it to illness. The result will be that fewer organs are needed from donation, and fewer people die because of religious stupidity preventing others to donate, or because they need rare organs because of general incompatibility. Machines are not biological, and currently we can design materials which integrate well into the body, without provoking immune rejection.

However as technology progresses, humanity will be able to create better organs than evolution, and thus open the way for voluntary organ replacement. As medical procedures, they will, especially the early ones, will cost a fortune. However, as it reads on the tin, you're buying actual superpowers for cash. As the trend continues, it will create a physical gap between rich and poor, who can afford transhumanism (haves), and those who cannot (have nots). And that will evolve into a caste system, which will be deepened when genetic transhumanism becomes invented. In a few generation of modifications, haves and have-nots will create two distinct species, unable to interbreed. Have-nots would be stuck forever down, and would easily become the chew toy of haves, being forced into slums, and towards onto slavery or extermination.

A society geared towards h+ will have no place for those left behind. Imagine Kryptonian society, where everyone is Superman, lifting tons with a single hand, shooting laser eyes, having x-ray vision and invulnerability. Imagine yourself as a baseline human getting there.
- What do you mean you can't lift it? It's just 1,200 kg, light as a feather! (Kryptonian proceeds to lift with her pinkie.)
- Just look in that box! Can't you see? (Box is welded shut, inside is obviously visible for those who has x-ray vision.)
- Welding is easy. Just shoot laser beams... With what? With your eyes of course, dummy... (Blue collar training...)

If not those feats, as they are physically impossible, however, h+ is capable of extensively enhancing the human condition, and another poster refered to them as Iron Man mass-produced. I believe that level of augmentation will become available one day.

[Trotskylvania]

Transhumanism is inevitable. We've been using technology to enhance and change our lives since we had the cognitive ability to realise banging rocks together might yield something useful.

Think about, most of us ware watches 24/7, people might as well have their phones surgically implanted given the amount of time they use them, and bionic medical implants just keep getting more advanced.

I embrace it fully. I don't think a purely biological body is necessary to maintain humanity. All the matter's is what is in your head. It's all information. Everything you feel is information begin processed by your brain. I don't see what would be lost If we merged with technology fully, becoming post physical if you will.

And consider this, the internet already allows us to interact as something of a collective mind (one that admittedly wouldn't be allowed anything sharper than a spherical sponge given some of the people on it). Having our minds merged with a super computer, the end result of transhumanism in my view, would simply be the natural evolution of this.

The information, and how it reacts and develops is determined by the physical structure of your brain, and the unique properties of the biological matter of your brain. To say that leaving our biology behind will mean we are still human is totally disingenuous, especially with your acceptance of the terminology of transhumanism.

Radically changing the physical hardware of consciousness will mean radically changing consciousness. We should have no illusions about this. If this process makes us better, more virtuous and happier than we would sticking with gray matter, than it should be encouraged. But if we are still just the same as we were or worse, than obviously it should be avoided.

[Imperial Nilfgaard]

Transhumanism is inevitable. We've been using technology to enhance and change our lives since we had the cognitive ability to realise banging rocks together might yield something useful.

Think about, most of us ware watches 24/7, people might as well have their phones surgically implanted given the amount of time they use them, and bionic medical implants just keep getting more advanced.

I embrace it fully. I don't think a purely biological body is necessary to maintain humanity. All the matter's is what is in your head. It's all information. Everything you feel is information begin processed by your brain. I don't see what would be lost If we merged with technology fully, becoming post physical if you will.

And consider this, the internet already allows us to interact as something of a collective mind (one that admittedly wouldn't be allowed anything sharper than a spherical sponge given some of the people on it). Having our minds merged with a super computer, the end result of transhumanism in my view, would simply be the natural evolution of this.

The information, and how it reacts and develops is determined by the physical structure of your brain, and the unique properties of the biological matter of your brain. To say that leaving our biology behind will mean we are still human is totally disingenuous, especially with your acceptance of the terminology of transhumanism.

Radically changing the physical hardware of consciousness will mean radically changing consciousness. We should have no illusions about this. If this process makes us better, more virtuous and happier than we would sticking with gray matter, than it should be encouraged. But if we are still just the same as we were or worse, than obviously it should be avoided.

I take it your not a proponent of mind uploading?

[Trotskylvania]

The information, and how it reacts and develops is determined by the physical structure of your brain, and the unique properties of the biological matter of your brain. To say that leaving our biology behind will mean we are still human is totally disingenuous, especially with your acceptance of the terminology of transhumanism.

Radically changing the physical hardware of consciousness will mean radically changing consciousness. We should have no illusions about this. If this process makes us better, more virtuous and happier than we would sticking with gray matter, than it should be encouraged. But if we are still just the same as we were or worse, than obviously it should be avoided.

I take it your not a proponent of mind uploading?

No, I am a proponent of necessary caution and rigor in all things scientific. But I really don't think that mind uploading is possible, there are a whole lot of good scientific reasons why whole brain emulation alone is going to be difficult, let alone being able to totally emulate a given consciousness. The gradual replacement of your brain with computers, which is still a perilous task that we can't even begin to understand, is really the only way to guarantee continuity in consciousness.

I've already said that, hypothetically, if the benefit/risk calculus was right, I'd do it.

[Imperial Nilfgaard]

I take it your not a proponent of mind uploading?

No, I am a proponent of necessary caution and rigor in all things scientific. But I really don't think that mind uploading is possible, there are a whole lot of good scientific reasons why whole brain emulation alone is going to be difficult, let alone being able to totally emulate a given consciousness. The gradual replacement of your brain with computers, which is still a perilous task that we can't even begin to understand, is really the only way to guarantee continuity in consciousness.

I've already said that, hypothetically, if the benefit/risk calculus was right, I'd do it.

Once scientists fully reverse engineer the brain, it will become possible.
The brain should be fully reverse engineered by 2029, according to Kurzweil.

[The Emerald Legion]

I think many technologies should be preserved but I don't know if transhumanism could be attained without destructive industry. I probably should've stated that that was kind of a generalization (I have talked to some green transhumanists and even an anti-civ transhumanist, which I'd like to hear more details about) but I see the movement's roots and many of its adherents as being pro-industrial and sometimes disdainful of the biosphere. Sorry if I started a redundant/annoying debate, I'm just kinda grumpy about transhumanism because of singularitarians, The Emerald Legion, and shit like this (also I think the last time we discussed this was a year or two ago). It's kinda like how there are cool and anti-authoritarian groups within the Abrahamic religions but much within the texts is authoritarian; there are transhumanists who reject techno-utopianism and a modernist view of progress but that's the framework from which the movement spread.

We're pretty close politically, I'm just more in the doomer camp than she is.

I'm not sure whether to be honored or upset...

In any case, while I'm certainly not alone, people of my particular... views are certainly not the majority of transhumanists by far.

Also, it's a general rule of thumb to only listen to people who are actually working on a project as to whether or not it will be done by a certain time. Hence, ignore Kurzweil.

[Natapoc]

If you really want transhumanism:

1. Get a phd in neurology or a related field (Getting experience in surgery would be helpful so try to get an MD also), and the equivalent of a 4 years in computer science (focus on computational intelligence techniques, algorithms, and the theory of computation).
2. Spend years in research labs studying the state of the art.
3. Disregard everything you ever learned and think of every totally insane and crazy theory you could every imagine and test them out methodically. You will probably have no funding so being rich, or being willing to live in poverty is probably going to help. Think of the most creative thing you ever have done and put yourself in the mindset where you could do something 1000X more creative while also being accurate. (By this time you will know HOW to be creative in a way that produces real science (not just sifi)).

If you do all these things and are extremely lucky you could have a very very small chance of wining a Nobel and moving your goal of a transhumanist future forward by perhaps as much as 0.0001% But that's what you and all other transhumanists need to do if there is to be any hope of getting what you want within your lifetime.

You will only be able to test a few of your hypothesis in your lifetime so be sure you make good guesses.

[Antares XII]

Isn't everything "just philosophy"?

No. Not everything is "just a philosophy". This chair I'm sitting on, for example, is not a philosophy (Although many various philosophies effected the way it was built and a certain set of world views influenced my ability to obtain it)

Transhumanism is a world view and philosophy (Or part of a world view, Some could argue that transhumanism is nothing less than the dominant mode of western thought since the enlightenment given a different name). When I say it's "just a philosophy", read that in the context of the previous sentence.

I mean that there is no reason to control or ban it because it's harmless. It's just an idea and ideas can't be controlled banned or regulated. Even the technologies that transhumanists desire can't really be controlled or regulated effectively.

Any attempts to control, ban, or regulate transhumansim would be counterproductive (and probably result in an increase in the number of self identified transhumanists)

I'm not even arguing against you here, because your stance seems more or less reasonable. Except for the fact that everything is just philosophy.

From Merriam-Webster:

4a : the most basic beliefs, concepts, and attitudes of an individual or group

In context, transhumanism is just philosophy. As is that chair, because you believe it exists. Whether or not it exists independently of you is irrelevant, by using it you are believing that it will not vanish from underneath you, and that it will fulfill its role as a seat. It exists as an idea and concept in your mind.

[Natapoc]

No. Not everything is "just a philosophy". This chair I'm sitting on, for example, is not a philosophy (Although many various philosophies effected the way it was built and a certain set of world views influenced my ability to obtain it)

Transhumanism is a world view and philosophy (Or part of a world view, Some could argue that transhumanism is nothing less than the dominant mode of western thought since the enlightenment given a different name). When I say it's "just a philosophy", read that in the context of the previous sentence.

I mean that there is no reason to control or ban it because it's harmless. It's just an idea and ideas can't be controlled banned or regulated. Even the technologies that transhumanists desire can't really be controlled or regulated effectively.

Any attempts to control, ban, or regulate transhumansim would be counterproductive (and probably result in an increase in the number of self identified transhumanists)

I'm not even arguing against you here, because your stance seems more or less reasonable. Except for the fact that everything is just philosophy.

From Merriam-Webster:

4a : the most basic beliefs, concepts, and attitudes of an individual or group

In context, transhumanism is just philosophy. As is that chair, because you believe it exists. Whether or not it exists independently of you is irrelevant, by using it you are believing that it will not vanish from underneath you, and that it will fulfill its role as a seat. It exists as an idea and concept in your mind.

No, the concept of the chair is an idea or concept. The chair itself is not a philosophy. The chair exists regardless of if my belief (although I realize this statement excludes certain unscientific belief systems)

[New Event Horizon]

People say how much they want their flying cars and jetpacks. Krek that. I want my Cyberspace uplink jack and optic neuron mesh. As you can tell, I am a supporter of transhumanism and the responsible (and thus regulated, but only as much as needed) use of the technology needed. I think that if done right, we can advance ourselves extensively while at the same time being able to preserve and expand our ecosystems instead of endangering them. If done wrong, however....

[Napkiraly]

If you really want transhumanism:

1. Get a phd in neurology or a related field (Getting experience in surgery would be helpful so try to get an MD also), and the equivalent of a 4 years in computer science (focus on computational intelligence techniques, algorithms, and the theory of computation).
2. Spend years in research labs studying the state of the art.
3. Disregard everything you ever learned and think of every totally insane and crazy theory you could every imagine and test them out methodically. You will probably have no funding so being rich, or being willing to live in poverty is probably going to help. Think of the most creative thing you ever have done and put yourself in the mindset where you could do something 1000X more creative while also being accurate. (By this time you will know HOW to be creative in a way that produces real science (not just sifi)).

If you do all these things and are extremely lucky you could have a very very small chance of wining a Nobel and moving your goal of a transhumanist future forward by perhaps as much as 0.0001% But that's what you and all other transhumanists need to do if there is to be any hope of getting what you want within your lifetime.

You will only be able to test a few of your hypothesis in your lifetime so be sure you make good guesses.

Not all transhumanism is based on computers or the brain, Jesus F Christ not all transhumanists are Kurzweil fan boys. Cybernetics, genetics, for some mechanical prosthesis, nanotechnology, etc. can all be transhumanistic. And we have seen some advancements within the past decade and a bit. By mid-century who knows where we will be.

[Imperial Nilfgaard]

If you really want transhumanism:

1. Get a phd in neurology or a related field (Getting experience in surgery would be helpful so try to get an MD also), and the equivalent of a 4 years in computer science (focus on computational intelligence techniques, algorithms, and the theory of computation).
2. Spend years in research labs studying the state of the art.
3. Disregard everything you ever learned and think of every totally insane and crazy theory you could every imagine and test them out methodically. You will probably have no funding so being rich, or being willing to live in poverty is probably going to help. Think of the most creative thing you ever have done and put yourself in the mindset where you could do something 1000X more creative while also being accurate. (By this time you will know HOW to be creative in a way that produces real science (not just sifi)).

If you do all these things and are extremely lucky you could have a very very small chance of wining a Nobel and moving your goal of a transhumanist future forward by perhaps as much as 0.0001% But that's what you and all other transhumanists need to do if there is to be any hope of getting what you want within your lifetime.

You will only be able to test a few of your hypothesis in your lifetime so be sure you make good guesses.

Not all transhumanism is based on computers or the brain, Jesus F Christ not all transhumanists are Kurzweil fan boys. Cybernetics, genetics, for some mechanical prosthesis, nanotechnology, etc. can all be transhumanistic. And we have seen some advancements within the past decade in a bit. By mid-century who knows where we will be.

Most are

[Napkiraly]

Not all transhumanism is based on computers or the brain, Jesus F Christ not all transhumanists are Kurzweil fan boys. Cybernetics, genetics, for some mechanical prosthesis, nanotechnology, etc. can all be transhumanistic. And we have seen some advancements within the past decade in a bit. By mid-century who knows where we will be.

Most are

Source.

[Rainbows and Rivers]

I remain skeptical of claims against Moore's Law. People have been predicting an upcoming plateau in computing speeds for at least the last decade. According to some of the more pessimistic predictions we should have hit a brick wall way back in 2008.

[Natapoc]

If you really want transhumanism:

1. Get a phd in neurology or a related field (Getting experience in surgery would be helpful so try to get an MD also), and the equivalent of a 4 years in computer science (focus on computational intelligence techniques, algorithms, and the theory of computation).
2. Spend years in research labs studying the state of the art.
3. Disregard everything you ever learned and think of every totally insane and crazy theory you could every imagine and test them out methodically. You will probably have no funding so being rich, or being willing to live in poverty is probably going to help. Think of the most creative thing you ever have done and put yourself in the mindset where you could do something 1000X more creative while also being accurate. (By this time you will know HOW to be creative in a way that produces real science (not just sifi)).

If you do all these things and are extremely lucky you could have a very very small chance of wining a Nobel and moving your goal of a transhumanist future forward by perhaps as much as 0.0001% But that's what you and all other transhumanists need to do if there is to be any hope of getting what you want within your lifetime.

You will only be able to test a few of your hypothesis in your lifetime so be sure you make good guesses.

Not all transhumanism is based on computers or the brain, Jesus F Christ not all transhumanists are Kurzweil fan boys. Cybernetics, genetics, for some mechanical prosthesis, nanotechnology, etc. can all be transhumanistic. And we have seen some advancements within the past decade and a bit. By mid-century who knows where we will be.

All transhumanist ideas I've heard of first require radical and unprecedented advancements in the understanding of the brain and human neurological system.

So many trans humanists lack the depth of scientific background to even begin to comprehend what they are saying. And most transhumanists actually ARE just fanboys. Perhaps not Kurzweil ones but fanboys non the less.

Most are not making real contributions to the technology and the basic science that must first be accomplished for their technology to even be possible. So I'm challenging them:

Dreaming is great but if all you're doing is dreaming you'll never get what you want. Getting what you want requires tremendous work, effort, and motivation.

Like someone else said in this thread: The problem with transhumanists is they tend to take for granted and not comprehend the seriously intensive work that real scientists have done to get the technology we have today and the pretty much impossible amount of effort that it would take to get the technology they describe as: "Trivial modifications" or "Simple progression" or "a couple steps" or " a matter of time" or "inevitable".

It's not any of those things, especially if you don't work on it. So I challenge you transhumanists: Try it! I dare you

Do the basic science. Do the actual work. Don't stand on the sidelines and pretend you're accomplishing anything at all. And don't pretend the universe will just gift you what you want. If you really want that future, go build it.

[Trolling Hajj]

I remain skeptical of claims against Moore's Law. People have been predicting an upcoming plateau in computing speeds for at least the last decade. According to some of the more pessimistic predictions we should have hit a brick wall way back in 2008.

Moore's law can't possibly be infinite though, at least not under the current dual-gate transistor model, eventually we'll need to move towards 3D transistors to have any chance at even perpetuating the trend. Plus its been long proven that the rate hasn't been doubling every eighteen months, which was the main tenant of the 1965 paper, its more like 24 months now.

[Napkiraly]

Not all transhumanism is based on computers or the brain, Jesus F Christ not all transhumanists are Kurzweil fan boys. Cybernetics, genetics, for some mechanical prosthesis, nanotechnology, etc. can all be transhumanistic. And we have seen some advancements within the past decade and a bit. By mid-century who knows where we will be.

All transhumanist ideas I've heard of first require radical and unprecedented advancements in the understanding of the brain and human neurological system.

So many trans humanists lack the depth of scientific background to even begin to comprehend what they are saying. And most transhumanists actually ARE just fanboys. Perhaps not Kurzweil ones but fanboys non the less.

Most are not making real contributions to the technology and the basic science that must first be accomplished for their technology to even be possible. So I'm challenging them:

Dreaming is great but if all you're doing is dreaming you'll never get what you want. Getting what you want requires tremendous work, effort, and motivation.

Like someone else said in this thread: The problem with transhumanists is they tend to take for granted and not comprehend the seriously intensive work that real scientists have done to get the technology we have today and the pretty much impossible amount of effort that it would take to get the technology they describe as: "Trivial modifications" or "Simple progression" or "a couple steps" or " a matter of time" or "inevitable".

It's not any of those things, especially if you don't work on it. So I challenge you transhumanists: Try it! I dare you

Do the basic science. Do the actual work. Don't stand on the sidelines and pretend you're accomplishing anything at all. And don't pretend the universe will just gift you what you want. If you really want that future, go build it.

And whose says they aren't? And take for granted the work that's being done? Maybe some, but not all. You really need to stop with the broad strokes with that paint brush of yours. I recognise and thank the men and women who are making these advancements and discoveries, hell I wish I could be with them.

I do plan on getting a engineering degree, whether or not its biomedical I haven't fully decided. And why do they have to become an engineer or scientist? Can we apply that thinking to every other philosophy or social theory as well? Only be a socialist if you're socialist politician/activist, only be an anarchist if you're an anarchist leader, etc.

I recognise it isn't going to be easy nor are the spectacular visions going to happen, at least within my lifetime unless something radical comes along. Seriously, I get it. You work in the computing field and the Kurzweil fan boys annoy you. They annoy me as well, but not all transhumanists are like them. Some are modest, some just support the underlying principle, some support it but think they can best support it through advocacy or bringing attention to it. I have yet to meet a transhumanist who thinks it'll just magically appear. Even the Kurzweil fan boys recognise it has to be built and that outside forces could potentially offset what they think is a fact on the advancement of computing power.

And to your first point, no not all of them believe we have to know everything about the brain and computers have to be at near human intelligence level to bring about. Many think advancements in cybernetics need to be made, or genetics, or whatever else they think contributes but not all think the whole mind upload thing is a requirement.

[Rainbows and Rivers]

Most are not making real contributions to the technology and the basic science that must first be accomplished for their technology to even be possible. So I'm challenging them:

Dreaming is great but if all you're doing is dreaming you'll never get what you want. Getting what you want requires tremendous work, effort, and motivation.

Like someone else said in this thread: The problem with transhumanists is they tend to take for granted and not comprehend the seriously intensive work that real scientists have done to get the technology we have today and the pretty much impossible amount of effort that it would take to get the technology they describe as: "Trivial modifications" or "Simple progression" or "a couple steps" or " a matter of time" or "inevitable".

It's not any of those things, especially if you don't work on it. So I challenge you transhumanists: Try it! I dare you

Do the basic science. Do the actual work. Don't stand on the sidelines and pretend you're accomplishing anything at all. And don't pretend the universe will just gift you what you want. If you really want that future, go build it.

Does working in bioinformatics count or do I need to switch over to full-on artificial intelligence before I can avoid pointless condescension?

[Napkiraly]

Most are not making real contributions to the technology and the basic science that must first be accomplished for their technology to even be possible. So I'm challenging them:

Dreaming is great but if all you're doing is dreaming you'll never get what you want. Getting what you want requires tremendous work, effort, and motivation.

Like someone else said in this thread: The problem with transhumanists is they tend to take for granted and not comprehend the seriously intensive work that real scientists have done to get the technology we have today and the pretty much impossible amount of effort that it would take to get the technology they describe as: "Trivial modifications" or "Simple progression" or "a couple steps" or " a matter of time" or "inevitable".

It's not any of those things, especially if you don't work on it. So I challenge you transhumanists: Try it! I dare you

Do the basic science. Do the actual work. Don't stand on the sidelines and pretend you're accomplishing anything at all. And don't pretend the universe will just gift you what you want. If you really want that future, go build it.

Does working in bioinformatics count or do I need to switch over to full-on artificial intelligence before I can avoid pointless condescension?

Of course, because all transhumanists are of the AI, Singularity variant. *nod*

[Norstal]

No, I am a proponent of necessary caution and rigor in all things scientific. But I really don't think that mind uploading is possible, there are a whole lot of good scientific reasons why whole brain emulation alone is going to be difficult, let alone being able to totally emulate a given consciousness. The gradual replacement of your brain with computers, which is still a perilous task that we can't even begin to understand, is really the only way to guarantee continuity in consciousness.

I've already said that, hypothetically, if the benefit/risk calculus was right, I'd do it.

Once scientists fully reverse engineer the brain, it will become possible.
The brain should be fully reverse engineered by 2029, according to Kurzweil.

How is this any different than predicting Jesus' second coming?

[Napkiraly]

Once scientists fully reverse engineer the brain, it will become possible.
The brain should be fully reverse engineered by 2029, according to Kurzweil.

How is this any different than predicting Jesus' second coming?

It's not really. It's commonly called the Rapture of the Nerds.

[Phocidaea]

Either way, the Singularity is coming so buckle up!

Please provide a reasonable argument - aside from "Read Ray Kurzweil" - or stop proclaiming this as such a definite truth.

[Trollgaard]

How is this any different than predicting Jesus' second coming?

It's not really. It's commonly called the Rapture of the Nerds.

Haha, yes, I have heard of that. I can't wait...well, actually I can wait, but it will be interesting to see 2030 and see what people are saying if it doesn't happen!