How do you feel about human augmentation?

Well as pointed out in the article I posted about AI, as well as other times by me here in the past, the "AI Winter" is long gone and we are in a time of rapid development, so "elusive" is a misnomer.

Again, "turn on us" is probably a misnomer, we really shouldn't take it personally, but yes, without supplanting the very real time when Strong AGI makes an appearance with our own human-derived AI, we will probably wind up an interesting afterthought very quickly. The faster we augment the better.

I've provided statistics from AI experts on when this might happen before. The majority agree on the 25-35 year timeline(I believe it was 60%), with another large percentage in the 50-75 year range, but almost all agree before 2100.

 

It's annoying as much too to hear people say stuff like that though when you bring up something like this.

New Agers give me the shits.

 

https://futurism.com/humanity-is-about-to-transition-to-evolution-by-intelligent-direction/

The rate of human evolution is accelerating as we transition from the slow and random process of “Darwinian natural selection” to a hyper-accelerated and precisely directed period of “evolution by intelligent direction.

We are no longer in the nature-only phase of evolution, but soon it'll transition to this directed phase.

The author of the blog:
Dr. Peter H. Diamandis is an international pioneer in the fields of innovation, incentive competitions and commercial space. In 2014 he was named one of "The World’s 50 Greatest Leaders" – by Fortune Magazine.

In the field of Innovation, Diamandis is Founder and Executive Chairman of the XPRIZE Foundation, best known for its $10 million Ansari XPRIZE for private spaceflight.

Diamandis is also the Co-Founder and Vice-Chairman of Human Longevity Inc. (HLI), a genomics and cell therapy-based diagnostic and therapeutic company focused on extending the healthy human lifespan. He is also the Co-Founder and Executive Chairman of Singularity University, a graduate-level Silicon Valley institution that studies exponentially growing technologies, their ability to transform industries and solve humanity’s grand challenges.

In the field of commercial space, Diamandis is Co-Founder/Co-Chairman of Planetary Resources, a company designing spacecraft to enable the detection and prospecting of asteroid for precious materials. He is also the Co-Founder of Space Adventures and Zero-Gravity Corporation.

Diamandis is the New York Times Bestselling author of Abundance – The Future Is Better Than You Think and BOLD – How to go Big, Create Wealth & Impact the World.

He earned an undergraduate degree in Molecular Genetics and a graduate degree in Aerospace Engineering from MIT, and received his M.D. from Harvard Medical School.

Diamandis’ mission is to open the space frontier for humanity. His personal motto is: "The best way to predict the future is to create it yourself."

In 2016, the Greek Government honored him by issuing a 1.2 Euro stamp into circulation. Also in 2016, the book How To Make A Spaceship – A Band of Renegades, an Epic Race, and the Birth of Private Spaceflight, Peter’s biography and the story of the XPRIZE was written by Julian Guthrie with a Foreword by Richard Branson and an Afterword by Prof. Stephen Hawking.

 

@RAMA, have you read Nick Bostrom's "Superintelligence"?

 

Prejudice is hardly limited to any one side.

In any case: As long as any of the augmentation we're discussing here is strictly optional, then I have no problem with it. It's only if it starts getting forced onto the general population that there'd be cause for concern.

And we all know how realistic CSI is.

 

I know, but a ton of other shows have used that idea and they did it on Mythbusters too and it worked.

 

I agree. It would be so nice if we could put aside our poorly-rationalized faith-based ideologies and stop trying to advertise and/or preach the virtues of whatever religious belief satisfies our individual emotional yearnings...

Nevermind...

 

Smart phones and social media accounts are optional. They are useful tools with caveats. If you opt not to have them, you are disadvantaged among those that do. The same goes with wearable or implanted technology that presents or immerses the brain in data. You will not be forced to opt in, but if you don't, you'll be left behind.

 

In response to the OP (and I haven't read the rest of the thread yet) I am in total support of pretty much all of this stuff. I work in medical research so I support most science that prompts progressive and positive change.
I don't even disapprove of purely aesthetic alterations (e.g. metal spikes in the skull, etc.) since it's an individual's own body and I assume they've thought through things. Kids are another story... and I know why my mom made such a stink when I was 15 and wanted a tattoo (I got one a few years later after I moved out of her house, lol).

 

Yeah but some people do some bloody weird things to their bodies that makes you look at them funny. There's some guy or dude in the USA that put a ring in their cheek that was essentially a large round hole so you could see inside their face. Eeeewwwwwwww I mean where do you draw the line for stuff?

They did this in the name of "art" but I'm not sure I would call it art.

 

Meh, I have a high tolerance for art, er, bodily mutilations... all it took was one viewing of The Skin I Live In to desensitize me.

BTW, Tetragrammaton, your avatar is cool- I loved that film as a kid.

 

Yeah it's a fun film and I usually watch it once a year towards December when there is nothing on TV but shitty reruns and reality TV. Speaking of which the snatchelor is on soon here so the DVDs will soon come out of the cupboard. I loathe shows like that and RTV in general.

Link to guy with hole in cheek. Warning might gross you out.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-flesh-tunnels-face-planning-make-bigger.html

 

Yeah, that's moderately extreme... having watched about a billion horror films during my tenure here on Earth so far I've become pretty immune though. Still, that would be a bit much for the average Joe waltzing down Park Ave.

On the television note: don't tell anyone, but about the only actual TV I watch is horse racing and the occasional NFL game. And Star Trek, of course. The last TV show that I actually followed in real-time was the X-Files though, and prior to that it was Twin Peaks (the original). So I'm more of a film-mouse I guess.
One last thing: you might check Save the Green Planet (2003) sometime if you haven't seen it... it's different from Green Slime (hardly anyone beats Kinji), but it's pure hilarious madness in parts.

 

I will have to look that up.

There is a small Italian film called Planet Of The Vampires that feels very much like the original Alien, in fact I wonder if that's where he got the idea.

 

Planet of the Vampires is pretty good, but it's not my favorite Bava film by a longshot, and it is definitely where the concept for Alien came from. Mario Bava has actually influenced quite a number of filmmakers that came after him (including John Carpenter and Refn among others).

 

Has Bava done anything more scary?

 

"Scary" is pretty much wholly subjective, but Bava has done loads of horror films. He's known as the master/Godfather of the giallo (the Italian precursor the slasher film) and he's done a bunch of non-giallo Italian horror films that are excellent imo:

Black Sunday 1960- features Barbara Steele at possibly her best and, visually, the film is stellar
The Whip & the Body 1963- more of a Gothic-style horror feat. Christopher Lee
A Bay of Blood 1971- this film inspired Friday the 13th and has a LOT of similarities. If you like slasher films then by all means check it out

I need to re-watch Kill, Baby, Kill since I'm fuzzy on the details, but a slew of films from Candyman to Burton's Sleepy Hollow were influenced by this one.

Having said all that my top 3 Bava films are:
The Evil Eye (aka The Girl Who Knew Too Much)- John Saxon is excellent and it's a good combo of thriller/mystery, drama, with a few lighter moments thrown in.
Blood & Black Lace- largely considered the first giallo film and it's visually stunning with some really tense moments/scenes
Rabid Dogs (not to be confused with the butchered American version called "Kidnapped")- a dark, and somewhat mean-spirited crime thriller. I loved it. Found it be well-acted, well-filmed and nice and rough.

IMHO you can't really go wrong with Bava... he was a cinematic genius of sorts.

 

Oh that sounds interesting.

Weird British movie from 1971called Assault. Described loosely as a giallo.
Only watched for Suzy Kendall and a young Lesley Anne Down who then was 17. It's an odd film about murders of pretty schoolgirls.

 

Woah, I actually have Assault on DVD at home, but haven't watched it yet.
Kendall was in a lot of 60s/70s flicks with the giallo label (or similar). If you haven't seen any of Sergio Martino's films you should check him out as well. Kendall was in one called Torso that's the bomb! (I loved the score for this one, among other things).