Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[MetalSlimeHunt]

It's not a victory for the xenos scum, that's for sure.

[Moghjubar]

Just remember, if you don't attempt immortality by chopping your head off with an auto-decapitator and auto-linker to an auto-sustainer, its just committing suicide!   

And if you don't take rigorous notes, film it, and upload the documents to the masses in case you fail, so that they may improve their chances, its immoral!

[Lagslayer]

Really, all we need to do is support the brain to achieve immortality.

That's all the body is: Support system for the brain. Well, non-evolutionary speaking.

Step 1: Support the brain outside of the human body.

Step 2: Translate the brain to something indefinitely durable. I.E. won't succumb to Alzheimer, dementia, brain-damage, etc.

Whether that's brain-uploading (which has it's own philosophical issues) or replacing the neurons with a more durable analog, or basically bolting on new hard-drives to your brain that the brain can, over time, migrate into as new connections are formed and the various functions of the brain (memory, learning, sensation, thought, etc) are taken up by the silicon brain. Then even if you lose your original meat-brain, it'd be no more of an issue for you than if you were to lose a few dozen brain-cells right now. Relatively minor loss, getting even more minor as you bolt on more and more space and take it up. Basically the same as the second way, with some differences. (I.E. bolting on whole-cloth parts and waiting for it to be engaged versus replacing each connection individually, keeping the original connections versus making them irrelevant, retaining some semblence of the original neural structure versus "Eh, as long as it thinks, nevermind the structure" of bolt-on)

Bam, immortality. All you need now is some way to manipulate reality (hands, or radio-controlled nano-particles, or organic meat-sacks grown around a radio receiver instead of a brain, whatever) and to sense reality (cameras, aforementioned meat-sacks) and you're golden~

The mechanism and materials of the brain are both integral parts of what makes us think the way we do. To change either or both would fundamentally alter your thought patterns. It's not even you anymore.

[Knit tie]

Really, all we need to do is support the brain to achieve immortality.

That's all the body is: Support system for the brain. Well, non-evolutionary speaking.

Step 1: Support the brain outside of the human body.

Step 2: Translate the brain to something indefinitely durable. I.E. won't succumb to Alzheimer, dementia, brain-damage, etc.

Whether that's brain-uploading (which has it's own philosophical issues) or replacing the neurons with a more durable analog, or basically bolting on new hard-drives to your brain that the brain can, over time, migrate into as new connections are formed and the various functions of the brain (memory, learning, sensation, thought, etc) are taken up by the silicon brain. Then even if you lose your original meat-brain, it'd be no more of an issue for you than if you were to lose a few dozen brain-cells right now. Relatively minor loss, getting even more minor as you bolt on more and more space and take it up. Basically the same as the second way, with some differences. (I.E. bolting on whole-cloth parts and waiting for it to be engaged versus replacing each connection individually, keeping the original connections versus making them irrelevant, retaining some semblence of the original neural structure versus "Eh, as long as it thinks, nevermind the structure" of bolt-on)

Bam, immortality. All you need now is some way to manipulate reality (hands, or radio-controlled nano-particles, or organic meat-sacks grown around a radio receiver instead of a brain, whatever) and to sense reality (cameras, aforementioned meat-sacks) and you're golden~

The mechanism and materials of the brain are both integral parts of what makes us think the way we do. To change either or both would fundamentally alter your thought patterns. It's not even you anymore.

I don't think that's scientifically proven. We need to perform some of those brain-computer substitution experiments before we can conclude anything.

[Lagslayer]

The mechanism and materials of the brain are both integral parts of what makes us think the way we do. To change either or both would fundamentally alter your thought patterns. It's not even you anymore.

I don't think that's scientifically proven. We need to perform some of those brain-computer substitution experiments before we can conclude anything.

It's like the difference between an aluminum car and a stainless steel car. Even if they perform the same basic functions, there's no getting around the quirks involving the specific materials.

[Putnam]

Your thought processes are (as far as we know) emergent and not an intrinsic part of your brain, so we should be able to emulate it reasonably without much difference.

[Knit tie]

The mechanism and materials of the brain are both integral parts of what makes us think the way we do. To change either or both would fundamentally alter your thought patterns. It's not even you anymore.

I don't think that's scientifically proven. We need to perform some of those brain-computer substitution experiments before we can conclude anything.

It's like the difference between an aluminum car and a stainless steel car. Even if they perform the same basic functions, there's no getting around the quirks involving the specific materials.

Still, we don't know yet if replacing, for example, your dopaminergic neurons with artificial nanomachine-installed ones to treat Alzheimer's will cause you to think or process emotions differently. All we have is guesswork and science fiction right now.

[Lagslayer]

Your thought processes are (as far as we know) emergent and not an intrinsic part of your brain, so we should be able to emulate it reasonably without much difference.

How much is too much?

Also, most of the specific processes are emergent (except maybe instinct?), but how they emerge and develop is a result of the brain structure. Just as the composition of the soil and water affect the plants growing in them, the composition of the brain affects how thought develops.

I'm sorry if this is kinda turning into the psychological transhuman thread again.

The mechanism and materials of the brain are both integral parts of what makes us think the way we do. To change either or both would fundamentally alter your thought patterns. It's not even you anymore.

I don't think that's scientifically proven. We need to perform some of those brain-computer substitution experiments before we can conclude anything.

It's like the difference between an aluminum car and a stainless steel car. Even if they perform the same basic functions, there's no getting around the quirks involving the specific materials.

Still, we don't know yet if replacing, for example, your dopaminergic neurons with artificial nanomachine-installed ones to treat Alzheimer's will cause you to think or process emotions differently. All we have is guesswork and science fiction right now.

I suppose experiments would need to be conducted to reinforce it, but I am 100% confident in my statement as of this moment, and whenever I had brought it up on this forum. I would gladly put my money where my mouth is, so to speak.

[Descan]

*shrug*

I see no reason for the components of the brain to have such an impact on the brain that changing the components would eradicate your "you"ness.

Change, sure. But the whole bloody thing is changing, what's one more?

[Knit tie]

*shrug*

I see no reason for the components of the brain to have such an impact on the brain that changing the components would eradicate your "you"ness.

Change, sure. But the whole bloody thing is changing, what's one more?

Tzeentch finds your acceptance of change pleasing.

Anyway, I am all for gathering of proper scientific data. If it turns out that having a computer grafted to your brain turns you into HAL, then it's bad and not going to be done. If it just makes you slightly more calm/irritable/humorless/whatever, then we'll need to do the whole cost/benefit analysis.

Besides, there is that entire topic of how much your sense of self is defined by what factors. If we say that simply having your personality shift is equivalent to death of said "self", then it turns out that people die multiple times throughout their lives simply due to intristic brain development patterns.

Again, the whole brain thing needs research.

[Frumple]

The mechanism and materials of the brain are both integral parts of what makes us think the way we do. To change either or both would fundamentally alter your thought patterns. It's not even you anymore.

Frumple is entirely comfortable with Frumple's future decaying old-person body being converted into an effectively-immortal knowledge bot, and damn the potential personality changes. It's a helluva' lot more interesting legacy than some people that remember you (for maybe another few decades or something) and either some worm food or a pile of ashes. And some terrible misrepresentations in a history book if you're really lucky.

And if it has to be done younger, well, creating something from my flesh that will continue to actively interact with the world for centuries into the future as a direct legacy of my will is fine, too. Damn sight better than anything anyone can manage otherwise, really. I'd call that worth my brain, personally.

[Knit tie]

The mechanism and materials of the brain are both integral parts of what makes us think the way we do. To change either or both would fundamentally alter your thought patterns. It's not even you anymore.

Frumple is entirely comfortable with Frumple's future decaying old-person body being converted into an effectively-immortal knowledge bot, and damn the potential personality changes. It's a helluva' lot more interesting legacy than some people that remember you (for maybe another few decades or something) and either some worm food or a pile of ashes. And some terrible misrepresentations in a history book if you're really lucky.

And if it has to be done younger, well, creating something from my flesh that will continue to actively interact with the world for centuries into the future as a direct legacy of my will is fine, too. Damn sight better than anything anyone can manage otherwise, really. I'd call that worth my brain, personally.

* Transhuman-fist bump.

[Putnam]

Your thought processes are (as far as we know) emergent and not an intrinsic part of your brain, so we should be able to emulate it reasonably without much difference.

How much is too much?

I dunno, I'm pretty sure my brain is made up of entirely different parts than it was 10 years ago.

[Knit tie]

Your thought processes are (as far as we know) emergent and not an intrinsic part of your brain, so we should be able to emulate it reasonably without much difference.

How much is too much?

I dunno, I'm pretty sure my brain is made up of entirely different parts than it was 10 years ago.

Ah, but you see, neurons are highly conserved, which means that a lot of the cells that make up your brain right now are the same cells you were born with.

Also, transhumanism thread Y/N?

[Lagslayer]

I for one, believe the method of achieving immortality is as important as the immortality itself. Why not just increase the longevity of the biological tissue instead of replacing it completely? I hold the biological (especially genetic) integrity of the human species very highly. I feel that to consciously manipulate the individual genes is crossing the line, and that it is different from natural evolution, in a cultural sense (which is also important).

Do the ends really justify the means?

Also, transhumanism thread Y/N?

I guess Y, because I feel VERY strongly about this, and it's reasonably related.