I want to a Motoko
I already decided I'd only upload my brain if I was dying, so I wouldn't waste my life with megacorp shit while still being able to enjoy it later on.
>Swapping your robust human body parts for "superior" robot parts will leave you to get shut down for having thoughtcrimes against your government
Though that's something I think about very often. I would love to have robot parts, if they ever become good, but I'm also scared shitless of the implications that it has.
Yeah also you needs parts that you can fix yourself. If not you're also tied to your manufacturer.robotic limbs sound dope tho
Did you deliberately forget biopunk?
Tbh the fundamental problem with a lot of stuff like this is that people view rebellion/revolution as something catastrophic, rather than essentially a safety valve. For example, there's a great book, "The Moral Economy of the Peasant" that analyzes peasant rebellions in southeast Asia as being primarily caused by disruptions to equilibrium in subsistence level economies. So basically, people are constantly worried about food shortages, governments start taxing them without an eye to how that affects subsistence, they rebel, no taxes. Not an ideal system but simple and cyclical system. I think with the current system that we're all more or less living under, we're definitely in a plane above the subsistence level, but there's really no release valve for a lot of irrationalities. So the government can fuck up your healthcare, archive your internet, fuck with your computer, crash the economy, whatever, but there's nothing to stop them from doing any of that. Transhumanism's just going to make it worse.
What happens when we all become smartfridges? I dunno, death cults probably.
don't we have death cults already? I think now that we have a relatively more advanced social, political, and economic system, these cyclical "revolutions" will most likely be staged in the very venues that make things so complex. I think we already see that on the internet, in the turbulent global economy, and in the most educated levels of our society. I mean think about it, the US elected a meme for president because they were frustrated with the alternative.
>>614>these cyclical "revolutions" will most likely be staged in the very venues that make things so complex
You mean within institutions of power (governments, banks, companies, etc.) like individual actors or factions or do you mean like mass movements expressed culturally or something else?
Jokes on you I'll never have a girlfriend :,(
The age of cyborgs has already begun.
>what are pacemakers
>what are cochlear implants
Its not a matter of if it should happen or not because its already here. The real question (which admittedly you are alluding too) is how to implement it in a way that is safe and ethical. Unfortunately I dont really have an answer to that.
I think partially though, we need to address the education gap with technology. If we reach a point where we are capable of upgrading ourselves "just because" and not for life-saving or medical reasons, the general public needs a very clear understanding of how it works, how to install/deinstall the modification, and how to produce it. Just like how food companies have strict legal guidelines on transparency of ingredients, we will need similar for body modifications.
I think this is imperative for machine intelligence too. The general public needs to understand "the" ai, and vice versa. Information gaps occurring in everyday life breed problems.
The problem with this discussion, as with most other tech-unsafe discussions, is that there is a direct advantage to using it even if it's unsafe or morally dubious. It's like saying guns bad because now people can kill each other much more easily or surveillance bad because privacy, well there's a direct advantage to people with the power to change things if they use it and a direct disadvantage if they don't. It's inevitable.
feel like the people against cyber-transcending are the same ones that claim space is empty and we're all that's here.
I think transhumanism sucks mainly because I don't really see it as very necessary. Isn't simple human life enough? Do I really need to have a bunch of cool bionic parts attached to me? I feel like the negative possibilities out-way the possible positives, simply due to the positives not really being necessary, outside of medical purposes. I've had the same thoughts about tech in general, like if we really need computers or cars, even, if we just kept simple, smaller, or more traditional (in terms of tech and production) societies, but I feel like that would put me in a fringe that I have not done enough research to be in.
I would be lying if I didn't think cyberpunk stuff was cool, though, so it's not like I'm super against stuff like this, but I just don't get people who are super into it and want to progress so far. I can't look at a future society of cyborg-humans flying through space with brain-upload technology in a good light for some reason. I tend to idolize the simple pastures more I suppose (despite the shortcomings of living like that).
From the moment I understood the weakness of my flesh, it disgusted me. I craved the strength and certainty of steel, I aspired to the purity of the blessing machine. Your kind cling to your flesh, as if it will not decay and fail you. One day the crude biomass that you call a temple will wither, and you will beg my kind to save you, But I am already saved. For the machine is immortal.
Even in death I serve the Omnissiah.
Transhumanism isn't the problem. Poor security is. Granted, having electronic implants in your brain DOES provide more vectors of attack on your person, but I'd imagine in the future there would be sufficient protection against such things.