It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Alright. If you want to fight it, then go ahead. But go ahead and stop all posting on the internet, and you better encourage everyone else to do it as well, because your sole opinion is insignificant in the face of popular opinion, so your idea needs to go viral to enact any change. Good luck. Though I won't hold my breath that you'll succeed.
Actually there is no such thing as "good" or "bad". Things just are. Humans invent their own morality, but in the grand scheme of things everything we do on this planet is insignificant. Our entire planet could be wiped out tomorrow by a gamma ray burst, and the universe wouldn't even notice.
They've already made the decision.
And you will fall behind. No big deal, you are free to live your life out behind, but the next generation will be THAT much more ok with it all. Then the next and so forth.
originally posted by: Skaffa
How would cutting ourselves off from the internet combat the downsides of this technological integration / transhumanism?
It would only make things worse! Currently the internet is our only large source of information that has not been silenced for the gain of private interests (in most parts of the world).
We need the internet if we want people to be informed and unbiased. We also need people to think for themselves, and although the internet can lead a lot of people astray.. it can also do a pretty good job at teaching us how to think critically.
The internet can easily be independent from transhumanism, just like it is right now.
It is also not a necessary precursor.
I'm sorry but i don't understand your reasoning on this.
So what? Since when is being a nihilist a valid point of defense? Your'e not making any sense whatsoever.
Of course morals are our invention! They are not magical powers given to us by space aliens.. They are part of common sense, given to us by ourselves / nature because morals make this life a life worth living.
I care about feelings, about us having the chance of being sincerely happy, about moral values.
And I'm pretty sure I am not the only one.
The human race isn't all that bad (oh right.. uninteresting?? I don't even..), come visit us any time you like.
Well technically they didn't, most have been led to that decision without giving it much thought.
And even today the circumstances already leave the people that will ''stay behind'' in a disadvantage.
There will never be a fair choice.
Of course they will be ''OK'' with it, they won't even know any better!
My parrot is perfectly happy living in his cage / my apartment, but if he knew what he was missing out on.. Flying through the Amazon making love to other birds, being an actual bird.. He would be probably be pretty damn grouchy stuck in that cage.
Is ignorance truly bliss?
Maybe, but let's give humanity another chance before we give up on it.
At least let a part of it stay true to it's nature, to what it is, and in my own personal opinion, what it is supposed to be.
Besides, having a portion of humanity survive alongside the ''transhumanists'' or ''post humans'' or whatever they will be called might not only leave us with the fair choice we deserve, it will probably also keep the post humans on the right path because they will have something to compare their civilization with.
I'm also not suggesting we should abandon technology.
Like i said the internet is one of many things that has helped our growth.
I am simply suggesting that once we reach that point of (actual) no return, we should keep the choice a fair one.
Who knows, it might not go as planned.. at least then we would have something to fall back on.
It's all or none man. If you want the internet for all the things above then you have to accept where it leads us as a society, but if you fear the homogenization that is arising because of it, the self absorption, and anything we have discussed here then you need to abandon the internet. As long as we use the internet and continue down this technological path, this is our destination.
That's because the technology doesn't exist yet to directly integrate us with it. You are aware that this technology is being developed right? Look at Google Glass. Google wanted us to wear a computer on our faces. It didn't take, but that may be more due to Google being a software company and not a hardware company. Other companies are trying.
It's tough to explain without the sources. I have to get them together, but once I do, I'll write a thread on it.
I haven't actually given my personal opinion on how I feel about any of this. I'm just trying to unemotionally analyze trends alongside human behavior and technological progress.
That is their problem for not giving it much thought. Regardless, the die is cast. I don't know if you've noticed this or not, but critical thinking is hard. People don't like hard. They like easy and will do whatever they can to accomplish this. If that means turning their brain off, then so be it.
That's hard to say. The parrot never grew up in the conditions that would allow it to thrive in the jungle. It grew up in a cage. Could it even survive in the wild? Much less be happy about it?
Humans seem to think so.
What is it supposed to be other than a product of the universe? We aren't the end of evolution. We are just the most recent step in it, but that stairwell continues MUCH further beyond us. If that stairwell causes us to become completely dependent on technology, then so be it. As humans on this planet, we are completely dependent on oxygen as opposed to being completely dependent on helium or something. That's just how we evolved.
Well I hope you guys can get off this planet because the transhumanists are going to consume the world. How is independent thought going to compete against a giant hive mind that spans the entire planet with eyes and ears through every human that is connected to it?
Then why are you trying to shun the direction we are growing? Because it scares you? You appear to want to remain in stasis as we are now. Sorry, but the universe doesn't work that way.
Maybe. The s# could always hit the fan. Though I am becoming increasingly convinced that won't happen.
originally posted by: Skaffa
So there can only be one destination?
It probably won't be, but i think we should at least consider it.
I think i am aware.
I also vaguely suspect this technology might be a bit more developed than we know,
and we are simply not ready for it yet.
I kinda figured, but do you mind stating your honest opinion on the concept?
Well yeah, so be it.
If they have all the knowledge they need to make an informed decision easily available to them,
then it would be their choice to not consider it.
If I had the choice.. I would have never caged him (i inherited him).
Because although he might not survive in the wild as long as he would in a cage, he would at least be an actual bird instead of a confused little sexually deprived flightless being sitting on a stick all day, every day until he reaches a rotten age of 90.
I know he's become a bad analogy, since we are barely parrots.
But we will lose our essence, and giving that up should be our own well informed choice.
And I'm all for it.
Like i mentioned before, i used to be excited about it, and i still am actually,
but i don't think humanity as of now will know how to handle it.
We mainly learn by trail and error, but can we afford to make mistakes when changing the foundation of humanity?
Don't you think this technology could easily be used for nefarious purposes?
Garbage in.. garbage out right?
When it hits us, will we be truly ready? Will we be wise enough to not let it control us completely?
A premature birth is rarely a pretty thing to behold and it either dies or never recovers.
I know humanity might not ever be wise enough, but it seems like we are already on the verge of changing the way we think into something more sensible, maybe taking our time to do things right and taking a more careful approach could mean avoiding the ''growing pains'' completely.
There won't be any competition.
If we could reach a mutual agreement to peacefully let each other be why would we ever compete?
The hive-mind would not need us, nor our resources.
It would be smart enough to find more fruitful resources, if not here then on some other planet.
How can you even predict anything about this hypothetical future?
The ''singularity'' will turn everything upside down, if we could see it now.. we could never even try to understand it.
But i do suspect that it will not have many boundaries at first, and thus it might lose balance easily, and perhaps permanently, if we are not careful.
If we can manage it.. sign me up. But I'll need to see it to believe it.
It's not a destination. Destination implies direction and an end. It's just a never ending journey taking us where we go.
I think you are starting to get on the right track. There is a lot of wishful thinking in your post,
but we both know how humans really are. They are intolerant of differences. The only way to squash intolerance is to homogenize everything. Once the die is cast, there can be no going back short of a cataclysm.
It frightens me a bit from how overwhelming it is. I'd like to keep my individuality and feel there is some good to be gained from all the independent thought, but at the same time the idea of such a massive hive mind thinking as one would be AMAZING. Can you imagine the things that humans could accomplish if all minds were focused in one direction, willingly? Then the scientific concepts behind such a thing. Would you consider the mind a new life form? It's entire essence being smaller lifeforms. It is fascinating to think about.
Essence sounds like a vague concept that again implies intent. Why can't things just be because they are natural or otherwise?
It's not about being able to handle it like it is a responsibility being thrust on us.
Part of being a hive mind is that everyone thinks the same. There is no way nefariousness can be done to any of us. Right now, there are many influences on popular opinion throughout the internet, so you can't quite call any community on it a hive mind. But the beginnings of such are there. As a hive mind starts to take root, so too does homogenization of thought and behavior. Basically, everyone thinks the same and has the same goals and desires. How can someone abuse this if no one wants to willingly step out of line, even for personal gain?
We just develop until it is the norm.
It's not going to "hit" us. It's just going to slowly take over until we are it.
That's the thing. The idea of sensible. Everyone is human. Everyone deserves to live. Everyone deserves rights. These are all concepts that are being taught into the youth who take their opinions on the internet and create communities around them like this one. This change is going to be a peaceful movement, not a violent one. It is also going to be entirely voluntary (but no one will be conscious of making the decision).
The next stages of evolution are going to be organisms that can adapt to survive humans' destructive behavior. What will arise out of that will be just as incredible and beautiful as anything we've seen before.
First all life needs resources and while yes we may be peaceful towards ourselves, that doesn't mean this new mind would be peaceful to other life that isn't it.
I don't think we'll see what I am predicting in my lifetime or possibly even our children's lifetime. The resistance to such an idea is still FAR too strong.
originally posted by: Skaffa
I realize that, but i could say the same about yours.
This is true, however these differences might be helpful, without them there would be a lack of balance.
Imagine growing up without a family, without any one else to raise you properly, would you still be a well adjusted citizen? Although you might have had fights and disagreements with your siblings or parents, they helped you form your perspective, morals and ideals.
And for all we know the hive mind wouldn't need to be intolerant, and the leftover society would be unable to fight it anyway, peace could be possible since there would be a complete new set of rules.
I completely agree, it would be quite amazing.
But I'm trying to figure out whether this is a realistic scenario or looking at it through rose-colored glasses.
Would the hive mind be smart and durable enough to be unable to go corrupt or become controlled by other forces?
It could set the world free, but it might also be able to enslave it. Now maybe that's the fear talking, but i still feel like it is something we should think about, because it is not that far fetched IMO.
I appreciate my essence, my nature.. I like what I am unlike most transhumanists.
Should we not be able to cherish that? If we would not have this choice, our nature would cease to be.
IMO this tells me your last sentence is contradictory to your views.
Do you really think nature would be able to adapt quickly enough?
I don't believe it will be, there would be quite a lot of unforeseen side effects, both in our bodies and the world around us.
But it IS a responsibility, pretty much EVERY human being would be subject to this uncharted territory, why should we not be responsible about it?
How can you be so sure?
Initially i think there would still be divisions, these could never be allowed to settle or one part of the hive mind may start to control the other.
It will be a gradual process, but it will still happen quite fast and with increasing velocity.
Relatively speaking it would probably hit us like a ton of bricks.
Most likely it will happen too fast for us to thoroughly contemplate its effects.
It would have to be very gradual to be completely peaceful but this is not possible when the singularity occurs since this will boost all technological capabilities at incomprehensible speeds.
The question is whether the singularity will come before or after we are already all thinking alike.
If it doesn't, there will probably be some resistance.
So do you value the hive mind above all those other beautiful organisms? Will they really be able to adapt and survive?
Probably, but since it seems like a logical progression of technology, now should be the time to investigate it.
We also shouldn't underestimate Moore's law.
I don't really wish for this to happen. I just kind of acknowledge that we are heading in that path.
You have trouble imagining it because you cannot think of a reality without those things.
Well here is the thing. Since humans are emotional creatures, I'm pretty sure that we won't lose our emotions if my scenario played out. We may all think alike, but I'm sure that the hive mind would have an ego and emotional failings just like we do. How often do we see popular opinion favor something that is a bad idea?
Of course, the mind would be able to make mistakes. Trust the wrong things. Etc. That is how we learn, so a network of humans thinking the same way would probably learn the same ways that we do.
In that case, I would be incompatible with the hive mind. There would be no hesitation in thought for the people who participate in this. I am too unique and cherish certain differences to the point that I would never be compatible with joining a hive mind. That is why I said such an entity won't appear for at least a few generations yet.
Who says that it isn't? First off, punctuated equilibrium is a real thing where evolution speeds up to fill niches when holes in diversity appear (though it does still occur over millions of years).
Second, how do you know that WE aren't being used by nature to push life into the cosmos? Think about this for a second. As it stands life cannot exist off world without some sort of technological help. What if we using technology is nature's way of evolving a means to escape this planet and continue to spread?
What are we being responsible for? It would just be a change in the way we function. We would become parts of a whole. We would become the neurons in some brand new evolutionary superorganism. An organism that thinks biologically, but its body is made up of technology.
Then it isn't a hive mind. It's just a collection of like minded individuals.
More like it will happen and will be the norm before we even realize things are different. Even now, much of the world is incompatible with society of the past. We bathe regularly. We minimize bodily smells. We interact differently. If someone from present time went back in the past, he would be outed as a stranger, possibly even an alien, almost immediately. Yet we look around us at society like it is the norm.
Resistance is bred out of the population. Even if the singularity is imminent and there is much resistance, all that needs to be done is wait for the older generations to die out. Each subsequent generation will be that much more ok with it.
I see no reason why they couldn't. Evolution is about survival of the fittest. If the organism cannot compete with our intellect, then maybe an organism that can needs to evolve. That's how it works in nature.
That is why I brought it up.
originally posted by: Skaffa
Please state this in your upcoming thread.
A lot of people are idealizing the concept, we should stay skeptical as long as we are not ready for it.
Without balance, this could prove to be a problem.
As soon as the pendulum swings one way, it could stay there in stasis.
If everyone thought the war on drugs was a good idea, how long would it last if not forever?
Would it still be easy to notice our mistakes?
I hope we will be that patient.
Does punctuated equilibrium account for large scale changes like these?
We will adapt, sure, but the first few generations should still be watchful.
I have thought about it, and i don't oppose it.
But nature makes mistakes too, that is a large part of how it evolves.
Nature creates many different varieties / mutations so that the best ones may procreate, and the ''mistakes'' fall behind.
We on the other hand are considering to go on as one single mutation, let's make sure it does not become a mistake.
For ourselves, for the hive mind.
The transition could prove to be a delicate, fragile period, and it will set the course we head off to.
Any organism is most susceptible to lasting trauma in it's early life.
Don't you think it is possible that certain groups will initially choose to close off their connection from the mass?
I'm mostly talking about the higher ups, TPTB whatever you want to call them.
I would be wary of them when this technology starts to gain traction.
Exactly, we will be unable to go back if even for an inch so we should choose our steps wisely.
This is what I'm trying to say, the promises are great, but that just makes it easier for us to get ahead of ourselves.
Nature can be cruel at times, should we really start thinking exactly like it?
We have already given ourselves the ability to thrive while ignoring some of natures drawbacks.
This could give us the power to ignore them completely and make better use of natures positive aspects, I think that is what we should be aiming for.
We could still evolve and survive just as fine because as you said it yourself, nothing could stop us anyway.
I'm glad you did.
Yes, such things aren't celebratory. Though it's not like anyone alive will see what I'm talking about, so what's the point of celebrating it anyways?
The pendulum ALWAYS swings back. Our mistakes will still be recognizable.
Yes, we could potentially destroy ourselves tomorrow. But that is another path that would turn out glorious. As long as we don't destroy all life on the planet, evolution will repopulate the earth with new and unique life. Good thing cockroaches are impervious to radiation.
Actually, yes it does. For one it accounts for all scales.
No no no. We, as humans will continue to evolve. The evolution will look different, possibly directed by us, but it will definitely still be happening.
Their loss then. There is no way that an individual mind would ever be able to compete with the hive mind. Its intelligence would just FAR surpass anything an individual could throw at it, even the ptb. Money and power would be useless in the face of such overwhelming intelligence.
That's how all evolution works. At no point are we allowed to retrace our steps, we are always going forward into the unknown. So we should just embrace any changes that happen to us. No matter how crazy or outside our sensibilities they may be.
We already do. Or do you think about the plight of growing veal or slaughterhouses? Even if you do think about them, what are you doing to fix it? Eating vegetarian isn't enough, it isn't changing anything. Human sympathy only extends to other humans, and even then that isn't really the case.
Like controlling evolution?
Fun thought experiment, no?
originally posted by: Skaffa
All big ideas start small.
Besides, anyone interested in these kinds of things has a chance of arriving at ATS sooner or later.
I know it doesn't really matter, but still.
Eventually, but it might start swinging higher and perhaps also slower, this technology could function as an amplifier of humanity, both the good and the bad.
Sure, in the grand scheme of things, everything is as it should be.
Although, let's stay focused on humanity for now.
Again, even small things can have large consequences.
When we're talking about applying changes to the human body, changes our immune systems are not able to deal with for example, it has a chance of starting a chain reaction.
And although our bodies are quite durable, they can sometimes be quite fragile too.
We're talking about ecosystems, it's not something to be reckless with.
I wasn't implying our evolution would come to a halt, on the contrary, it would skyrocket.
But nature always has a plan B at hand and so it creates a steady and reliable progression.
We will only follow one path at a time, so once the pendulum swings the wrong way, how quickly can we change plans without anything else to go by?
I guess this is getting pretty vague, I was actually still talking about whether or not we could get stuck in our ways, without balance, without variety.
Well it depends, if they are the ones at the forefront of this technology, they could be able to find ways to use it to their advantage.
They could still be part of the rest of the hive mind, but the rest wouldn't have to be a part of them.
They could place limitations on it, i don't know, lots of things might be possible.
I'm perfectly willing to embrace evolution.
It's devolution I'm trying to avoid.
I never suggested we should go against nature, that's why I'm not a vegetarian, I'm an omnivore after all.
But we should keep it civilized, not cause any suffering if it is not necessary, and use technology to help us do that, instead of returning to our primal state.
Sympathy is a funny thing, i wonder how it will evolve along with us.
And it doesn't only extend to other humans, it extends to anything we can relate with.
Hehe, maybe that answers it, maybe we will lose cats and dogs and start keeping ants and bees as pets.
Ok, but keep in mind that focus on humanity is a flawed interpretation. We aren't the center of the universe nor the most important thing in it. Not even close. Such interpretations breed religion as it assumes that we have a destiny and such.
Fair enough. Thinking along those lines, the ptb would end up splitting the human species into two species. Because the ptb, staying out of the hive mind, but manipulating it would follow a different evolutionary path while the rest of the population would follow their path of being all connected at all times. Eventually the hive mind would grow smart enough and outgrow the ptb, and they'd either have to separate or face annihilation. I just don't see them being compatible for many generations.
Devolution doesn't exist.
Technology is just a race to decouple ourselves from nature, so you don't have to worry about returning to a primal state.
Nah, but insects, especially hive insects, would make GREAT biotech workers.