Print

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

[Thecard]

Yeah, think of them as tools.  There is nothing inhuman about relying on a hammer to put in nails, or on a calculator to solve complex formulas.  Implants for utility's sake aren't dehumanizing.

[alway]

Not even implants. It applies to more than just implants. I would argue you can be very much a cyborg without a single implanted device. Wearable computing; things like smart phones, google glasses, and many similar things in the pipeline today. You can get nearly all the same effects without the need for any sort of highly problematic implantation.

Implantation is, if anything, a very large limitation to what you can do, rather than the opposite. Today's 'smart phones' are plugged into the internet, giving immediate access to a massive database of the knowledge of humanity, complete with search-ability. They tell you where you are, what's around you, what's going on around you. That's every bit as much an augmentation as an implanted system would be. While simultaneously being safer, easier to upgrade, and easier to operate. It's a theme embraced by this particular ad I noticed today: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IYIAaBOb5Bo
"It's not an upgrade to your phone. It's an upgrade to yourself."

You may well become something one could consider a cyborg without even realizing it. But again, there is no dichotomous 'line in the sand' denoting what constitutes a cyborg and what doesn't.

[Thecard]

Well, yeah.  I mean, as I've said, I don't think we can dehumanize ourselves.  We can have tools, we can change ourselves, but that won't change the fact we're human.

[alway]

Oh, but we can. We very much can. And some most certainly will. But keep in mind that it is not a magic, overnight thing which will appear out of nowhere. It will be a continuation, a progression of previous work; such that by the time it occurs, it will not be an unthinkable fantasy, but will merely be considered 'somewhat weird, somewhat bizarre' by the general populace, similar to the "Grinders" of today who implant magnets in their fingers to attain a new sense: the ability to feel electromagnetism.

As soon as we begin toying with brain modification and augmentation, that's when all barriers of identity come crashing down. And we're seeing some of the precursors of that in the video from Nova Science Now I linked earlier; by modifying how the brain behaves, we are able to fundamentally alter how we think and who we are. Your moral judgement, your capacity for speech, for numbers; all of that can be fundamentally changed simply by a modification of the correct parts of the brain. And that's not even getting into the possibilities of easily implantable false memories (which, by the way, are already somewhat easy to create to some degree; our memory is much more fluid and malleable than nearly everyone believes). Whether or not you still believe yourself to be entirely human just depends how hard you want to fight to keep the illusion of the organic-artificial false dichotomy.

[penguinofhonor]

Oh my god that magnetism thing is so cool. I'd only be afraid of physical pain from touching powerful magnets.

I'm seeing the future and I want to be part of it.

[PanH]

An interesting thing related : teleporation.
In April 2011, some scientists managed to teleport some particles of light. It was the transfer of key properties from a particle to another, without any physical link between the two particles (over 800m, over the Danube).
The question is : where the particles teleported the same that the one that were teleported ? They weren't. It was another particle, with the same key properties, as copied from the original.
I don't believe replacing the brain is doable. Or well, that would effectively kill the first "mind", and make a copy. The only way something like that would happen is the real brain still existing, but effectively connected to his new body. The electrical impulsions from the brain would be transfered. Of course, that would mean re learn everthing about your body, as if all your members were replaced.
The more close technology of modifying ourself I see is replacing parts of ours bodies by artificially grown organs and such.


About false memory, altered capacity for speech, moral judgement, etc : already doable. No need for brain modification to do that. There's psychology tests that shows stuff like that (false memory being one of the easiest). That's also what happens when you change your minds, forgot something, etc. Your mind (or more accurately your brain), evolve and change.
What is the difference between how something you'll experience will have an influence on you (and everything does), and changes that are made by more "crude" modifications ?

[alway]

Oh my god that magnetism thing is so cool. I'd only be afraid of physical pain from touching powerful magnets.

I'm seeing the future and I want to be part of it.

Yeah, it's pretty cool. Aside from the whole back-alley-surgeon bit, the potential nerve and tissue death bit, the risk of rejection requiring immediate hospitalization to have it removed, ect.... Or in general, not something advisable without an actual surgeon and doctor; and they wouldn't do it, as they could lose their medical license over it. Or at least that's how it is for now. If it were safe and easy, yeah, I think over half the college students in engineering and computing majors would have them already.

As for teleportation: as far as I'm aware, none of them actually violate the general principles of relativity; or in other words, there is no super-luminal information transmission. Weird? Yes. Useful for transmitting information? No.

As for your second bit, that would put you at around the level portrayed by Ghost in the Shell; brain-cases hooked up to computers, with much of the brain itself being augmented with computer bits. While I've already gone over my opinion on the matter (brains can be duplicated and such, but with a very high technology barrier to it happening), and so will skip that bit, I will also say that hooking up to new parts wouldn't be as difficult as we expect.

The reason for this is not brain plasticity (we can adapt somewhat well, but it would still take about as long as rehab of people with nervous injuries takes today), but because it wouldn't just be the new part being attached. It would come with some weak-ai systems whose purpose would be interfacing the technology with our minds. Thus, it is simultaneously augmenting our bodies, but also our minds; it's similar to the function of the optic nerve: to pre-process the base impulses into more readily-consumable signals for the brain. This is already being seen with cybernetic eye implants. Without improving camera quality, researchers added optic-nerve-like signal processing to their replacement eye. The results are a massive improvement; as it effectively takes over the functions of that intermediary circuitry which is otherwise not there. Same will go for cybernetic enhancements which are not of the 'normalizing' variety; though to an even greater extent. These weak-ai systems are analogous to the Google self driving cars; instead of needing to 'drive' on its own, the brain can give more simple instructions like 'go there,' without needing to go through the extensive effort to learn how to drive a car, or in this case artificial body parts.

[PanH]

As for teleportation: as far as I'm aware, none of them actually violate the general principles of relativity; or in other words, there is no super-luminal information transmission. Weird? Yes. Useful for transmitting information? No.

Quantum computing.
But the point I was referring to was that there was a "teleportation" (as simple and yet complex as it was). The general process of the teleportation is the same as the one that would transfer a brain into a "computer". You have firstly a state of particle (or a brain), that you transfer into another particle : the result, while identic, and taking the place of the first, isn't the first. The brain isn't data.
The only potential outcome that would make able to transfer a "brain" into a computer would be, indeed, quantum computing. But that's something, while we have prototype, we are still far from understanding. And that wouldn't even resovle the issue I pointed (it's not the same).

As for your second bit, that would put you at around the level portrayed by Ghost in the Shell; brain-cases hooked up to computers, with much of the brain itself being augmented with computer bits. While I've already gone over my opinion on the matter (brains can be duplicated and such, but with a very high technology barrier to it happening), and so will skip that bit, I will also say that hooking up to new parts wouldn't be as difficult as we expect.

The reason for this is not brain plasticity (we can adapt somewhat well, but it would still take about as long as rehab of people with nervous injuries takes today), but because it wouldn't just be the new part being attached. It would come with some weak-ai systems whose purpose would be interfacing the technology with our minds. Thus, it is simultaneously augmenting our bodies, but also our minds; it's similar to the function of the optic nerve: to pre-process the base impulses into more readily-consumable signals for the brain. This is already being seen with cybernetic eye implants. Without improving camera quality, researchers added optic-nerve-like signal processing to their replacement eye. The results are a massive improvement; as it effectively takes over the functions of that intermediary circuitry which is otherwise not there. Same will go for cybernetic enhancements which are not of the 'normalizing' variety; though to an even greater extent. These weak-ai systems are analogous to the Google self driving cars; instead of needing to 'drive' on its own, the brain can give more simple instructions like 'go there,' without needing to go through the extensive effort to learn how to drive a car, or in this case artificial body parts.

Yes, and that's why I said that's what we're the closest from.
Although, on the "weak-ai". For optic nerve, it's well, quite simple. It is already harder for an arm : muscle, nerves are replaced, and will be a bit different (no tiredness, lots of differents parameters).
But what happens, when instead of connecting an artificial arm to you, you connect a computer, or the internet to you ? We don't have template to work on that, nor whatever to base our experience on. You can't code something that'll say : that impulse mean the "brain" wants to do that precise action on the computer. Firstly, because that's something that hasn't been done. Second, because the possibilities brought by a connection brain-computer are mostly infinite. We would have to learn to move and use that computer as we have to learn how to walk when we're a baby.

The "weak ai" are something that already exists in our brain. We don't think : send that impulse, then that one, etc, nor we think : move that muscle, then that one : we think : move [at least in our higher state of consciousness]. So, I don't even think we need them. At most, a converter impulse-something readable by computer, being electrical (current computers), or quantum.

[penguinofhonor]

Oh my god that magnetism thing is so cool. I'd only be afraid of physical pain from touching powerful magnets.

I'm seeing the future and I want to be part of it.

Yeah, it's pretty cool. Aside from the whole back-alley-surgeon bit, the potential nerve and tissue death bit, the risk of rejection requiring immediate hospitalization to have it removed, ect.... Or in general, not something advisable without an actual surgeon and doctor; and they wouldn't do it, as they could lose their medical license over it. Or at least that's how it is for now. If it were safe and easy, yeah, I think over half the college students in engineering and computing majors would have them already.

Piercers can't do it? That's disappointing.

I think the safest way would be to make a little sphere of [insert material that has low rejection risk] that the magnet bit goes in.

[PanH]

Oh my god that magnetism thing is so cool. I'd only be afraid of physical pain from touching powerful magnets.

I'm seeing the future and I want to be part of it.

Yeah, it's pretty cool. Aside from the whole back-alley-surgeon bit, the potential nerve and tissue death bit, the risk of rejection requiring immediate hospitalization to have it removed, ect.... Or in general, not something advisable without an actual surgeon and doctor; and they wouldn't do it, as they could lose their medical license over it. Or at least that's how it is for now. If it were safe and easy, yeah, I think over half the college students in engineering and computing majors would have them already.

Piercers can't do it? That's disappointing.

I think the safest way would be to make a little sphere of [insert material that has low rejection risk] that the magnet bit goes in.

It isn't organic. No rejection risk. Infections risks though. Technically, it's like a piercing, with the exception that the metallic bit is mainly under the skin as oposed to on the skin. But I wouldn't recommend it, and i'm a bit doubtful over the feeling. There must be a pretty strong field if you want that the vibrations will be perceived as such, and I don't think you can see them "naturely", not talking about what we already perceive of electromagnetic fields, and natural vibrations.
I think the main effect is actually the belief of being able to perceive electromagnetic fields.

[SalmonGod]

Love this thread (although I think the general tone towards Thecard has been undeservedly harsh).  Wish I'd got around to it sooner.

The whole identity/continuity/consciousness question is something I've thought about a lot for at least 10 years.  I used to be in the camp that believed a copy of me is not me, and it was all about maintaining stream of consciousness.  I find myself kind of drifting away from that recently. 

First, the arguments about how we naturally evolve over time or go through rapid changes and are never the same person we were in the past have really sunk in.  I think that's one aspect of the subject that just takes a lot of time and experience to fully process.  That's where me 10 years ago would have re-asserted "but that's why it's the continuity that matters and not the consistency".  I still think there's something to that, but I don't necessarily think a break in continuity is the same as death anymore.  It's something undesirable, but... it's... actually really difficult to describe my position on it, anymore.  I think there are multiple facets to identity.  It's not a binary thing, where you're either dead or not.  Loss of one facet isn't loss of the whole.

I see two major types of identity that are related and interact, but are not quite the same.  There's what you experience as your identity, which I'm increasingly recognizing as incredibly flawed, and your objective identity as could be described by an separate observer.  Experiential identity hardly needs any description.  It's what most of the discussion here has been about.  All I'll say is that it's a messy patchwork thing.  A frankenstein collection of mostly incomplete moments, notions, and falsehoods that is constantly evolving, often adjusting to match whatever our ego's current styles of thought and perception happen to be.  One of my biggest influences in truly understanding this was a single sequence of panels from the fantastic graphic novel Asterios Polyp.

Spoiler: google image search really came through for me on this one (click to show/hide)

So... where is identity in this?  You can say that it's in the moment.  Our collective experiences and innate tendencies combine to make us who we are right now.  But how much of us is really here right now, and how much of you is locked up in constant reflection and processing of the past, altering your perception of yourself and past/present/future realities, or cultivating future identities?  How can our identity be in the moment, when part of us is always examining other moments?

I don't mean to belittle that part of us, either.  I think it's really important.  It just isn't enough to completely define a person.  It seems to me like our cognitive processes are more central to our experiential identities than our memories or the hardware.

And that sort of brings me to the other major type of identity, which is a very strange alliance between my natural western enculturation in egoism and my loosely informed eastern spiritual influences.  The best way I can describe it is that the other part of our identity is a memetic entity.  We're an idea in action. 

The best thing I've been able to liken our identities to is the weather.  There are a lot of general consistencies, that are still subject to large degrees of variation and change, but the details are never the same.  If your life was made into a map, there'd be other similarities.  There would be The Weather as a very general term, indicating things like rain, sunshine, etc as univerals (your most prominent personality features that remain relatively constant).  The weather in any region also has its own personality (your stages of youth, your goth phase, how you were when you worked at that one job, etc).  And special events, like hurricanes, are generally treated as distinct entities as well (the only time in your life that you got really drunk and weren't at all yourself).  Imagine two strangers from completely different parts of the world talking at an airport about the weather.  They'd be talking about similar features, but in completely different contexts with many notable differences.  This is the same as a person who knew you 15 years ago talking about you with someone who knows you today.

I think I can take a hit to the identity that I experience in order to keep my memetic identity alive.  I'd be ok with being copied, which would keep me alive "in spirit".  Sort of like a piece of software, which is an analogy I think I've seen in this thread already.  When you're copied, you're not creating You 2.0.  I think we can all agree that Doom 3 was nothing like Doom 2, but fortunately Doom 2 is still alive in spirit.  After being ported to new platforms and engine upgraded and built-upon in many ways, it's still Doom 2.  The game lives on.  If those things didn't happen, it would be dead.  Similarly, I would still consider myself alive so long as my memetic identity is able to manifest in the world with individual agency.  Complete survival of this specific manifestation of myself would be the most preferable thing, but I wouldn't consider loss of it to be a complete loss of myself.

[Jelle]

Oh well this is an interesting topic, quite a read to take in the entire thread though. Before I do that I guess I'll just give my 2cents

Me personally I'm petty indefferent to augmentation or even full replacement of the human body. The same consciousnes just in another shell, what really makes the difference between an organic and a synthetic shell. In the end the human body is but another machine.

Tampering with the mind though now that's a different matter. Where do I draw the line? No idea really. I don't see anything wrong with augmentation I suppose. Significantly changing or cloning a consciousnes is extremely unethical to me, ofcourse what amount of changes is significant...

Ultimately bodily augmentation or replacement is a means to an end, I'm not so much interested in the mean as I am in the end.

[PyroDesu]

Man, I wish I'd noticed this earlier. Very nice discussions, though ya'll were a little rough on TheCard, I think.

My thoughts on the matter: We are nothing more than organic computers in charge of organic machines. Our brains are efficient for what they have (in terms of power/space used for data capacity and processing), but are still computers, albeit organic. Indeed, I find it fairly easy to draw parallels here, nerve impulses are binary, on or off, like the electrical pulses that allow a computer to exist. Different neurotransmitters are different programs, release of neurotransmitter X causes nerve impulse pattern X to fire, like running an executable in a computer prompts the circuits to fire. Our brains are ordered with mostly separate data processing (frontal lobe), input centers (visual cortex), output centers (motor cortex), data storage systems (memory). Our bodies are, quite similarly to the brain/computer part, also fairly easy to draw parallels to machines with, pumps for hearts, cameras for eyes, etc.

So really, I see no issue with replacing organic with mechanical. Even the brain (though I subscribe to the slow-replacement theory that's been bandied about here). Indeed, cybernetics are something that I would voluntarily get.

... I hope all of this sounds coherent. It's only about 8 in the morning and I'm not quite fully awake yet. typing this in my first class of the day because it's in a computer lab, I have nothing to do, and the teacher doesn't mind.

[inteuniso]

My thoughts on the matter: We are nothing more than organic computers in charge of organic machines. Our brains are efficient for what they have (in terms of power/space used for data capacity and processing), but are still computers, albeit organic. Indeed, I find it fairly easy to draw parallels here, nerve impulses are binary, on or off, like the electrical pulses that allow a computer to exist. Different neurotransmitters are different programs, release of neurotransmitter X causes nerve impulse pattern X to fire, like running an executable in a computer prompts the circuits to fire. Our brains are ordered with mostly separate data processing (frontal lobe), input centers (visual cortex), output centers (motor cortex), data storage systems (memory). Our bodies are, quite similarly to the brain/computer part, also fairly easy to draw parallels to machines with, pumps for hearts, cameras for eyes, etc.

See, you're right from an entirely scientific sense. The problem is, if you treat the human body like a computer, it happens to react badly. Mostly because by treating it like a computer, you're constantly thinking about it being a computer, imagining it. the entire body needs periods of rest and relaxation, including the brain. If you can let your brain relax, I've found I can be a more organized, more intelligent, and overall a more social person.

[Helgoland]

PTW.