It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


We'll be uploading our entire MINDS to computers by 2045 Google expert claims

page: 3
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in


posted on Jun, 19 2013 @ 12:12 PM
Well I think it's a bit of a leap to think that having the power and storage to contain the amount of assumed data that the mind would require, is the same as having the ability to actually download and store the actual mind.

I don't see that happening for a long time. Perhaps snap shots of the brain state, which may be similar to storing a backup.. with perhaps the possibility to restore this at some point, but the ability to alter it and see it and use it externally, I don't see.

We're far too chemical. We don't just think. We react, internally we are chemical reaction engines.

Everything that influences our mood, state of being, is not just the position of neurons in the brain. It's a reaction to a chemical we either produce ourselves or introduce artificially, by the food we eat, the medicines we take, the air we breathe, the water we drink, the pollution we ingest.

The 'You' that you are right now is not the same you it will be tomorrow, but you will not notice the changes as you are not suddenly switching states. you're just reacting to the now, which becomes then and eventually yesterday.

And everything from hunger, sex drive, exhaustion, anxiety, blood pressure, stomach contents, the plethora of flora inside your gut... all makes you slightly more who you are than any binary simulation can ever recreate.

I think that without the chemical machine that hosts our minds, we're nothing more than meaningless insanity. Without desire or direction. Survival causes motivation and a thirst for knowledge. Not simply being, as far as I can tell.

Now if they make it so we're artificially stimulated, like the Jem hadar from star trek ds9 who were created to perform one task, where we only do things because we are 'addicted' to something, then perhaps.. but what an existence. actually, it's not entirely different at all..

edit on 19-6-2013 by winofiend because: (no reason given)

posted on Jun, 19 2013 @ 12:13 PM
reply to post by micpsi

The mind would be unaffected. It would be the brain that is plugged in. You would carry your consciousness with you. It is immortal.

posted on Jun, 19 2013 @ 12:19 PM
Our Facebook profiles and other forms of Internet communication will document what kind of person we are and then those who hold temporal power can choose who is worthy of immortality. They already have all our information stored. I am sure there must be some undisclosed reason to have each person "book of life" stored in megasuper computer databases.

posted on Jun, 19 2013 @ 12:21 PM
I read an interesting book awhile back called Infoquake (I think). It dealt with some of these concepts as well. One of the coolest was that most people had a holodeck, or at least access to one, and using it you could project yourself virtually to any other deck on the planet as long as a link was established. So you could have a virtual business meeting anywhere in the world.

The premise of the book was based around a guy who sold software upgrades to people (who were by this point in transhumanist stage of existence). Things like "hawk like vision" or whatever. It dealt with corporate espionage in competing software companies and whatnot.

It was a bit of a difficult read, but the concepts were awesome.

posted on Jun, 19 2013 @ 12:23 PM
reply to post by JayinAR

So if we are all interconnected and can access every thought everybody ever had would that be a good thing ?

I have memories that are very personal to me alone, and some that are very intimate between two people that I think should stay that way, I'd be happy to share the feeling of love,or intimacy,or just the joy of a backwards glance and a smile, but the actual experience ? I feel that is mine and the other's alone.

Hmmmmmm this is deeper than first thought


edit on 19/6/13 by cody599 because: (no reason given)

posted on Jun, 19 2013 @ 12:25 PM
reply to post by cody599

I like the concept of stand alone systems. Unless of course you decided to link into the grid for whatever reason.

ETA: and you could partition your memories and store them some place safe. It is crazy to think about, but entirely possible.
edit on 19-6-2013 by JayinAR because: (no reason given)

posted on Jun, 19 2013 @ 12:40 PM
I would take all of my precious memories and store them on separate flash drives and just throw them in a drawer.
Then occasionally pull one out at random and plug it in.

I also imagine we woukd be able to re live those memories.

posted on Jun, 19 2013 @ 12:41 PM
reply to post by cody599

In just over 30 years, humans will be able to upload their entire minds to computers and become digitally immortal

30 years and how many thousands of human experiments?

Baconian and Goethean Science

The true spirit of this kind of scientism can be illustrated by a telling metaphor coined early in this epoch by scientism's seminal spokesman, Francis Bacon. He said, propounding scientific experimentalism, that we must put Nature on the rack and force Her to answer the questions we put to Her.

This figure will speak volumes to those who meditate upon it: We, seeking information for whatever motives, are to torture the Goddess who gave us birth and nurture, so as to cause Her, through unbearable pain and injury, to blurt out secrets which She, in her wisdom, conceals from the impure and self-seeking. In much of so-called "physiological research" and "medical training" this is hardly even a metaphor; the torture unto death is quite literal.

The usual victims are animals, but all too many "researchers" are not above using human "subjects" when they can get enough power over them. And even a slight whiff of occult knowledge shows us a deeper meaning: The central rite of "Satanism" or "black magic" -- sometimes crude, sometimes sophisticated -- is the deliberate, ritual torture and killing of animals and, at a more advanced level, of human beings.

When done in a precise way, this practice confers knowledge and power upon the practitioner; also, it affects the whole earth, hardening and rigidifying it, to the characteristic Ahrimanic purpose. Thus we can see the hordes of "researchers" and medical students -- who hurt, injure, and "sacrifice" animals -- as undergoing an unconscious, Ahrimanic black magic initiation, which hardens, brutalizes, and Ahrimanizes their souls, and through them also the culture, and even the earth itself. (Sacrifice is the actual word they commonly use, not thinking which "god" they sacrifice unto.)

Vivisection is truly the archetypal act of modern science as it is generally understood and practiced.

recommended reading: The Advent of Ahriman by Rudolf Steiner

Just consider how much evil mankind has done with the science we have acquired up to now, at our present stage of maturity (or immaturity), and then try to imagine what the relatively primitive people of the Seventh Century would have done with the science of 2493 AD.

This picture is bad enough, but we need to recall Steiner's occult insights to begin to get the whole picture. If Sorat had succeeded, Men would have lost the possibility of developing our true nature, and would have become egotistic, animalistic automata, with no possibility of further development. We would have become earth-bound*, and the earth could never then pass over to the Jupiter, Venus, and Vulcan stages.

As superconducting computers become more common, Ahrimanic beings higher than "elementals" might actually incarnate in them, since no physical energy is consumed in a superconducting circuit. (Ahrimanic "elemental spirits" inhabit our artificial machines, just as normal "elementals" [or "nature spirits": gnomes, undines, sylphs, salamanders] work in and throughout the living processes of Nature.) Black sums up: "Sunless light and Wordless logic intertwined, and out of them came the computer."

Thus, while Ahriman incarnates "microcosmically" in a human body, we might also face the "macrocosmic" literal incarnation of Ahriman in our machines.

then again even if Ahriman fails
it will still be ruined by lawyers

posted on Jun, 19 2013 @ 12:51 PM
Save a one gig spot for my mind. Most of what I know isn't worth downloading into a computer. If a computer had my knowledge it would want to move to Yap and sit on the beach fishing while chewing beetle-nuts.

posted on Jun, 19 2013 @ 01:51 PM
I always believed that was the reason for facebook and other sites like it. All the information we post, including these comments, are being stored into some kind of data base that will be used in future androids. Unfortunately, to gather all of our minds/thoughts will be nearly impossible to do. It would be like counting stars.

posted on Jun, 19 2013 @ 02:21 PM
I think Ray is right. This is the inevitable future. Information will increase and we will eventually die out, transfer our minds to computers or become Cyborgs. This is because our biological bodies will not be able to handle the information overload.

posted on Jun, 19 2013 @ 02:54 PM
reply to post by cody599

Greg Bear touched on this in his The Way series of books.

Mind uploading in general has been mooted as a possibility for quite some time now and several predictions for when it may feasibly be possible have been and gone with no significant breakthrough looking imminent.

I think it's a fascinating possibility and having witnessed the advancements that have occurred in my lifetime I certainly wouldn't dismiss the idea outright, but I doubt i'll see it happen - not too sure if that's a good thing or a bad thing.

posted on Jun, 19 2013 @ 02:56 PM
Is this kind of stuff considered "mark of the beast"?

There's so much technology coming out that derives man from his natural creation.

posted on Jun, 19 2013 @ 03:25 PM
Wouldn't need more than an old 256kb flash drive for my mind.

posted on Jun, 19 2013 @ 04:14 PM
reply to post by winofiend

Good post but don't judge future AI's by today's standards. I'm sure Kurzweil is thinking about having enough processing power and sorage to simulate a human brain down to every sub atomic particle at useful speeds. Not what is considered an artificial neuron today but a generic physical simulation. This will include the entire electro-chemical system.

Then comes the much more difficult problem of copying the states of every brain cell etc to the simulated brain.

posted on Jun, 19 2013 @ 04:18 PM
How would you know the difference between being on a computer and real life? How do you know that isn't the case now?

posted on Jun, 19 2013 @ 04:24 PM
Isaac Asimov also wrote a brilliant short story that touched on this concept. I think it was called One Final Question. Anyone interested can find it online and it is a very short read.

One of my favorites.

posted on Jun, 19 2013 @ 04:39 PM
I wouldn't care so much to do the upload thing. I'd much rather do the download thing, like in Matrix. I like to know several languages, calculus, history of the world, sciences, medicine etc., all the educational stuff and all the encyclopedic info. That mixed with my unique perceptions would be killer.

oops, spelling and grammer two

edit on 19-6-2013 by StoutBroux because: (no reason given)

posted on Jun, 19 2013 @ 04:55 PM
Oh great. they will have All your info then.
and they Will imprison you for your thoughts.
or just Re'Wright you!!!

and when you Down load!
who are you? have you been hack't
is it all Your brain.
what have the government added?

you could take over some one,
commit a crime then put their minds back.
how can the prove this did Not happen?

posted on Jun, 19 2013 @ 05:01 PM
reply to post by cody599

He just writes and says stuff people want to hear. In fact, he wants to hear it himself. But the reality is there's nothing to save you. You will die. Your body will get old. There're bad things that will happen and you cannot prevent them or avoid them. So what's the lesson? I think it's to cherish the moments you have and make them good because your time is short here.

How do you want people to remember you? That's a question we have to all ask. Because when we're dead there's no way to save face or to correct the path we're on.

Another thing is, even if he's right, I think there're consequences to the world he says we'll live in. I don't think that world will be anything like the one we live in. In fact, to even transition to that world will probably require a large scale war or plague or something. It won't transition smoothly. And then even if it does, it'll change everything that we use to define what a human is today. How're we going to delete the memories of people today so that people of tomorrow care not for the past? Will they be told that people in the past were disabled and unable to know what was good from bad?

30 years? Give me a break. Humanity will require thousands to make the changes he wants. And then that's even assuming it's possible. We can't change on a dime. Hence, for this to happen in a quicker time period, it might require the total extermination of modern day humans.
edit on 19-6-2013 by jonnywhite because: (no reason given)

new topics

top topics

<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in