Ultimate fate of humanity (what if I don't want to be uploaded)

[Windbag]

One of the things I've always enjoyed about the fiction of Asimov, Star Trek or, say, Orson Scott Card is the vision of a future in which people are pretty much just people, albeit with vastly advanced technology. In the Foundation universe there are androids and spaceships with hyperdrives but the average man or woman doesn't have any enhancements.

I think we've all had our moments where we'd like to be uploaded into the vast virtual consciousness and experience omniscience. And don't get me wrong: I earnestly look forward to a future that could be described as "Kardashev II" or something along those lines, and I like the idea of evolution rocketing past biological boundaries. Just - maybe not for me, if the opportunity comes up in my lifetime.

What about plain old homo sapiens? After I had kids I immediately saw the upside to mortality: an endless effervescence of childhood, of ancient knowledge newly discovered. The prospect of growing old and dying lost a lot of sting when I saw my daughter figure out how to do somersaults.

Do you think we will create a future in which there is a place for ordinary folks, or will we all be heavily modified cyborgs soon?*

*Soon-ish. You know what I mean, singularity etc.

 

[EyeSeeCold]

To some extent I think you can take a look at contemporary society to get an answer; so far industrial demands and social conformity have driven human adoption of technological innovations. Cybernetic implants/prosthetics is a pretty big deal, at least in terms of them being versatile and safe* so I think it'll be a long while before that happens. However, I could only see a capitalist society working humans to death that it'd require cyborgs as a labor force. Otherwise I don't think the social popularity of them alone could cause organic humans to live on the fringe of society.

 

[DeltaForce]

Maybe the reason for that was because the exploration of genetic modifications or bionic implants was before their time. It's also possible that they believed the moral implications of it would confuse their readers.

I think it's logical to assume that at the bare minimum,humanity will deal with some sort of robotic implants in the near future,the smartphones and portable devices of this generation are proof of that. We're already progressing into augmented and virtual reality with Google Glass and the Oculus Rift. Consumer technology is trying it's best to blend seamlessly with the human world. It's only a matter of time before these external accessories become part of our bodies.

 

[Cognisant]

Technology does have a tendency to creep up on you, I mean Windbag I'm going to guess you have a smartphone, a computer and a modern car and at no point before buying any of these things did you consider the ramifications, aside from maybe the cost of owning a car. Becoming a cyborg will be much the same, it may begin with a hearing aid or maybe an ID chip (think passport except you can't lose it) or maybe even a subdermal mobile phone with a speaker & microphone implanted in your jaw, you'll still look perfectly human.

You won't feel any less human, you'll be as you are now plus the peace of mind of always having the means to contact someone in an emergency or to verify your identity.

Now the slope starts to get slippery, your eyes aren't as sharp as they used to be but that can be fixed, your joints start to ache but that can be fixed, your muscles and bones are weakening but that can be fixed, preventative treatments for Alzheimer's and dementia are offered to you, would you dare refuse them?

But it's fine, you're not a robot, these things haven't really changed you.

Along the way you've acquired little enhancements, your sight is better than it ever was, your hearing is better too, now your daughter is in her teens and she wants a BCI (brain computer interface), it's the new laptop, everyone has one, indeed there's clear educational advantages to having one (although she really want it to talk/play with her friends). It makes you uncomfortable but the procedure is safe, affordable, she won't appear any different and you don't want to be like those awful fundamentalist parents, so at length you agree.

Pretty soon you have one too

 

[Duxwing]

I agree with Cognisant and further hold that your daughter is her own, separate person and not your biological continuation.

-Duxwing

 

[RaBind]

Great post by Cog. All I'd add is an emphasis to the enhancements being a good thing. These enhancement will come to people as a way for them to reach their goals and fulfill their desires.

In you initial post you seemed worried about losing what makes you human. You're going to have to go through the philosophical subject of "what am I?/What are we?". But specifically you seemed to think that the fact that you are a homo sapien is important to being human. I think you are holding onto something that is redundant. It is similar to people who want to keep pure genes( I mean that in both a racial sense, and also any other way, such as keeping royal blood pure), in the sense that it is quite irrelevant to what makes people who they are. The problem is that over the 100,000 years that humans have been around, genes has pretty much been mixed all around. Pure genes probably don't even exist (as all humans once originated from the same place), and even if they existed I don't think those people would be any different, to your everyday person, at least in the things that matter. Just like this humans have pretty much already seamlessly integrated technology into society. Even those few societies which try to refrain from being in contact with technology use tools, which are a primitive form of technology. So there really is no pure society or human. Functionally even humans have already seamlessly integrated with technology. People already use technology to enhance their capabilities and senses, telephone enhance the reach of you hearing capabilities, information on the internet which you access enhances your capability to store and retrieve information, cars enhance you ability to travel... You are opposed to becoming something which you already currently are, only because now you are starting to be able to physically see what you are.

 

[Cognisant]

Actually I think he's more worried about "cyborg vigor" (kind of like heterosis) making it critically disadvantageous to be anything less than this:

Spoiler

I can't wait for my shiny chrome ass but I wouldn't want to force it upon anyone else, however being a full body cyborg will come with some game breaking advantages which if not somehow regulated will create a class separation between those who are cyborgs and those who aren't, forcing people who wouldn't otherwise choose to be cyborgs to adapt or get left behind.

 

[Cognisant]

Of course the notion of cyborgs being nightmarish metal men is pretty outdated, as I said a BCI may be so well concealed you'd never know it was there and I have no doubt that prosthetic bodies that are externally indistinguishable to human will be available soon after, so the issue isn't how we will look or feel, the real issue is a loss of control.

Y'know when you buy/build a new computer and it immediately needs all manner of third party software to do all the things you want it to do, that sense of eroding control as different programs start automatically updating or engaging in processes of unknown purpose. Heck I like to think I'm a pretty tech savvy guy, that my computer is pretty secure, but if my computer was my body I'd want a lot more peace of mind and if I wasn't tech savvy that reassurance may be almost impossible to get.

So at the heart of it the fear isn't of metal men or dehumanization, it's of losing that me/you barrier, you can't look inside my head or fiddle with my heart rate because they're in my body, under my control, whereas if I was a cyborg and you were one of any number of engineers who developed my body's software/hardware you could because you would know my body better than I do.

That's legitimately scary.

 

[RaBind]

Actually I think he's more worried about "cyborg vigor" (kind of like heterosis) making it critically disadvantageous to be anything less than this:

Spoiler

That's not what I got from the op. Being/staying human and the possible difficulties is the main topic that runs throughout his post. So I asked him to look back at what a human is, and why he even thinks he is still a "normal" human, when he has enhanced his abilities so much that most humans, who have ever lived thoughout history, would probably consider him as some sort of god. Also the image link is broken. The issue you raise is a more legitimate one, which I believe can be worked around, with laws and legislation.

I can't wait for my shiny chrome ass but I wouldn't want to force it upon anyone else, however being a full body cyborg will come with some game breaking advantages which if not somehow regulated will create a class separation between those who are cyborgs and those who aren't, forcing people who wouldn't otherwise choose to be cyborgs to adapt or get left behind.

We've already done that with technology, to the armish and any other culture that is against the use of technology. It is the reality of change that those who adapt will gain an advantage and those who don't have a disadvantage. I don't think you can change this universal law just because you feel uncomfortable about it. That being said, a law or policy to ease the transition will probably be introduced and is probably the responsible thing to do. I don't think people will need to be forced to change if they like the change.

Of course the notion of cyborgs being nightmarish metal men is pretty outdated, as I said a BCI may be so well concealed you'd never know it was there and I have no doubt that prosthetic bodies that are externally indistinguishable to human will be available soon after, so the issue isn't how we will look or feel, the real issue is a loss of control.

Y'know when you buy/build a new computer and it immediately needs all manner of third party software to do all the things you want it to do, that sense of eroding control as different programs start automatically updating or engaging in processes of unknown purpose. Heck I like to think I'm a pretty tech savvy guy, that my computer is pretty secure, but if my computer was my body I'd want a lot more peace of mind and if I wasn't tech savvy that reassurance may be almost impossible to get.

So at the heart of it the fear isn't of metal men or dehumanization, it's of losing that me/you barrier, you can't look inside my head or fiddle with my heart rate because they're in my body, under my control, whereas if I was a cyborg and you were one of any number of engineers who developed my body's software/hardware you could because you would know my body better than I do.

That's legitimately scary.

Say a company made the first fully functional cyborg body, which people could upload their consciousness into, to get a new body. However there is a catch. The users get a new body at the cost of their freedom to choose what the want and their individuality. I don't think the majority of people would take that deal. The company wouldn't make a profit and another company that can provide better cyborg bodies will surpass them.

It would also be avoided if we could have our cognitive capabilities as the first enhanced aspects of ourselves. Then with our enhanced cognitive capabilities we could start to upgrade everything else along with upgrading our already enhanced cognitive capabilities. In a sense we would all go indie, and it would be just like today but with everyone functioning at very high cognitive capabilities.

 

[Windbag]

I agree with Cognisant and further hold that your daughter is her own, separate person and not your biological continuation.

-Duxwing

Well that's no logical contradiction to me. We are all individuals and all part of the river of life stretching back to biogenesis. I'm made of the bits and pieces that make up my parents and so am a biological continuation of them, albeit in a different configuration and so on.

I appreciate you immediately stepping in to protect my daughter's autonomy.

 

[Windbag]

Functionally even humans have already seamlessly integrated with technology. People already use technology to enhance their capabilities and senses, telephone enhance the reach of you hearing capabilities, information on the internet which you access enhances your capability to store and retrieve information, cars enhance you ability to travel... You are opposed to becoming something which you already currently are, only because now you are starting to be able to physically see what you are.

Yes. I doubt that today I've performed a single action that wouldn't have been science fiction in the early 19th century. I like to say that the last Age of Man was just prior to the invention of the steam engine, with all the attendant evils of slavery etc. I'm sorry - my OP did come across as if I didn't appreciate the fact that I'm embedded in a long chain of man-made electrical, mechanical and chemical processes.

I suppose this is what I'm stabbing at:

Right now, we live in a human zoo, and we are all the zookeepers. Soon we can automate most of the operation of that zoo. That leaves us with two options which are not incompatible, as people can choose one destiny or another.

1. Redesign the zoo to better suit human instincts so that people are happier. Recreate the social/emotional feel of a hunter-gatherer society, minus the warfare, toothaches, infant mortality and the like. They'll be the Amish of the 22nd century. Meanwhile our robots colonize space and run virtual worlds and carve up the solar system into a Dyson sphere or whatever the hell they want to do.

2. Merge with the machines and remain the zookeepers.

What does life look like for people who choose door #1?

 

[Jennywocky]

To some extent I think you can take a look at contemporary society to get an answer; so far industrial demands and social conformity have driven human adoption of technological innovations. Cybernetic implants/prosthetics is a pretty big deal, at least in terms of them being versatile and safe* so I think it'll be a long while before that happens.

I do agree with that last bit -- the practical and tangible issues with converting people into full-scale androids is not close at hand. (We don't even understand how the human brain and consciousness works to deal with stuff in our meat bodies, let alone converting to some kind of artificial format.)

But i think there will be a lot of "tech creep" like Cog suggests. Little things that don't seem to fundamentally change the human body will become available, and soon pass from fringe to mainstream in terms of acceptance, usefulness, and affordability. (People freaked out about LASIK, for example, when it started; but now many have gotten that enhancement. Soon it could just be routine, if costs drop. And LASIK could even be an improvement, with people gaining eyesight better than 20/20. No, it's not a mechanization, but it's a "surgical correction/improvement." When will we see modifications become routine that are minor enhancements to daily living? And when will minor shift to major?)

We're finally also starting to learn how to use brain triggers to move parts of bodies/machine. A small stumbling step, but still heading in the direction of eventually being able to send brain impulses as instructions to mechanization.

I'm always curious if the ability to make mechanical corrections to the human body makes us biologically weaker. Basically, people who would normally not reproduce and pass on negative/weaker genes now can survive and thrive because of additions made after birth -- compensations -- and so the genes that used to weed themselves out now actually proliferate.

 

[Duxwing]

Well that's no logical contradiction to me. We are all individuals and all part of the river of life stretching back to biogenesis. I'm made of the bits and pieces that make up my parents and so am a biological continuation of them, albeit in a different configuration and so on.

By that logic, we're really just the Big Bang, but such thinking is impractical: your daughter is a separate, sentient being.

I appreciate you immediately stepping in to protect my daughter's autonomy.

Not my point at all. I intended to assert that she is a separate being; your identities are not fused.

-Duxwing

 

[Absurdity]

By that logic, we're really just the Big Bang, but such thinking is impractical: your daughter is a separate, sentient being.



Not my point at all. I intended to assert that she is a separate being; your identities are not fused.

-Duxwing

Impracticality is nebulous and arbitrary.

Saying his daughter is a separate being and not fused is either trivial (because I think OP would know if he reproduced asexually by budding) or incorrect (because she is inextricably metaphysically linked to her father; she would not exist were it not for him and she perpetuates his genes).

His choice to identify with her as a legacy is an emotive one that you can't dispute by sheer logic alone. Your perspectives simply differ.

 

[RaBind]

Right now, we live in a human zoo, and we are all the zookeepers. Soon we can automate most of the operation of that zoo. That leaves us with two options which are not incompatible, as people can choose one destiny or another.

1. Redesign the zoo to better suit human instincts so that people are happier. Recreate the social/emotional feel of a hunter-gatherer society, minus the warfare, toothaches, infant mortality and the like. They'll be the Amish of the 22nd century. Meanwhile our robots colonize space and run virtual worlds and carve up the solar system into a Dyson sphere or whatever the hell they want to do.

2. Merge with the machines and remain the zookeepers.

What does life look like for people who choose door #1?

The same as what life looks like for the amish, and other similar societies, today I suppose. They will be oblivious to what is happening outside their society. Even if they had access to information about what's happening they probably won't be able to keep up.

I'd add that many humans will merge with the machines but won't remain as zookeepers, instead they will join the robots in exploration.

 

[Duxwing]

Impracticality is nebulous and arbitrary.

It's casological: although he and his daughter are causally linked, thus considering them is useless beyond studies of causality because his attitude would be identical had she at birth been secretly swapped with another baby.

Saying his daughter is a separate being and not fused is either trivial (because I think OP would know if he reproduced asexually by budding) or incorrect (because she is inextricably metaphysically linked to her father; she would not exist were it not for him and she perpetuates his genes).

Their existences are causally linked, but their thoughts, emotions, and perceptions are not. Granted, some of her genetic properties derive from him, but they remain two brains in two skulls.

His choice to identify with her as a legacy is an emotive one that you can't dispute by sheer logic alone. Your perspectives simply differ.

I can't force his mind to change, nor can I remember his writing that he chose to thus view her; my reasoning may change his mind.

-Duxwing

 

[Windbag]

I can't force his mind to change, nor can I remember his writing that he chose to thus view her; my reasoning may change his mind.

-Duxwing

Nope. She's mah baby.

 

[Duxwing]

Nope. She's mah baby.

And therefore...?

-Duxwing

 

[RaBind]

Don't really wanna bump this but I just found this video that may be helpful. It doesn't address what will happen to human who don't want to participate but rather why people shouldn't fear participating, which I think is the main issue anyway. They point to what I said in my last post briefly around the end of the video.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bTMS9y8OVuY
They'll probably release more videos on this.