Tio saker transhumanister misslyckas med att förstå

Testa forumets olika funktioner. Detta är även platsen för tramsiga inlägg och oseriösa diskussioner.
Användarvisningsbild
NeuraltNätverk
Avstängd
Inlägg: 6039
Blev medlem: lör 04 jul 2009, 23:30
Ort: in der Bunkeranlage

Re: Tio saker transhumanister misslyckas med att förstå

Inlägg av NeuraltNätverk » tor 08 aug 2013, 03:08

Kartesius skrev:Transhumanism måste vara det woo-woo som tilltalar flest "skeptiker".
Once the machine thinking method has started, it would not take long to outstrip our feeble powers. ... At some stage therefore we should have to expect the machines to take control, in the way that is mentioned in Samuel Butler's Erewhon.
Bild

Alan Turing för Årets förvillare 2013.

Användarvisningsbild
NeuraltNätverk
Avstängd
Inlägg: 6039
Blev medlem: lör 04 jul 2009, 23:30
Ort: in der Bunkeranlage

Re: Tio saker transhumanister misslyckas med att förstå

Inlägg av NeuraltNätverk » tor 08 aug 2013, 03:50

You will be unsurprised to hear that you are not the first transhumanoid to pout and stamp at hearing I find you ridiculous and say why in a sustained way. The Robot Cult is nonsensical in many ways on its own terms but also illustrative and symptomatic of pernicious but more prevailing reductionism, determinism, eugenicism, productivsm, consumerism. Even this highly schematic essay addresses your perplexity on this score -- and I have written many others that are far more elaborated than this rather introductory one if you are actually interested in criticisms of your supremely luminously powerful futurological ideology. You will be much more convincing in your effort to demonstrate how much more sophisticated you are in your own personal transhumanism if you reveal an ability to read at a basic level.
Det måste vara intressant att kunna ha en livlig konversation med sina egna halmgubbar.

Användarvisningsbild
HerrEkberg
Inlägg: 416
Blev medlem: tor 17 jul 2008, 15:52
Ort: Uppsala

Re: Tio saker transhumanister misslyckas med att förstå

Inlägg av HerrEkberg » tor 08 aug 2013, 09:52

matsw skrev:Stora problemet för tramshumanismen är ju att en "uppladdning", om den funkar, bara är en kopiering. Så på det individuellt sett är det kört.
Inte för individen som är kopian.
All bildning står på ofri grund till slutet, blott woo var en gång fosterländskt.

Användarvisningsbild
Kartesius
Inlägg: 528
Blev medlem: fre 15 apr 2011, 08:56

Re: Tio saker transhumanister misslyckas med att förstå

Inlägg av Kartesius » tor 08 aug 2013, 13:38

NeuraltNätverk skrev:Alan Turing för Årets förvillare 2013.
http://forum.vof.se/viewtopic.php?p=592795#p592795

Användarvisningsbild
NeuraltNätverk
Avstängd
Inlägg: 6039
Blev medlem: lör 04 jul 2009, 23:30
Ort: in der Bunkeranlage

Re: Tio saker transhumanister misslyckas med att förstå

Inlägg av NeuraltNätverk » tor 08 aug 2013, 22:04

Kartesius skrev:
NeuraltNätverk skrev:Alan Turing för Årets förvillare 2013.
http://forum.vof.se/viewtopic.php?p=592795#p592795
Turing var genial, alltså han hade fel och bara biologiska enheter (i synnerhet människor) kan tänka. (Och jag är ingen dualist!)

Låter rimligt.

Användarvisningsbild
NeuraltNätverk
Avstängd
Inlägg: 6039
Blev medlem: lör 04 jul 2009, 23:30
Ort: in der Bunkeranlage

Re: Tio saker transhumanister misslyckas med att förstå

Inlägg av NeuraltNätverk » fre 09 aug 2013, 03:59

http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID ... 6017037797

Hoppas att det följande godkänns:
"Go to the Superlative Summary where you will find me directly addressing actual pieces by actual futurologists"

I'm aware that Ray Kurzweil and Eliezer Yudkowsky are daft. But that implies neither that transhumanism is a technically infeasible project, nor that it is an undesirable one. You seem to think that criticizing them is sufficient to dismantle the whole concept. It is not.

Indeed, you like to point out that these figures have little to do with any real technological developments. You'd be right. See here for example: http://www.darpa.mil/WorkArea/DownloadA ... x?id=1778‎

"Enhanced Human Performance is aimed at preventing humans from becoming the weakest link in the U.S. military by exploiting the life sciences to make the individual warfighter stronger, more alert, more endurant, and better able to heal."

One can see such things as are being worked on here:

http://www.darpa.mil/Our_Work/DSO/Focus ... ology.aspx

These research projects are articulate in their technical detail, not pie-in-the-sky "futurology", and are already yielding concrete dividends, in the field of prosthetics for instance. One can even see videos of these results in action on YouTube. On a related note, non-human locomotion has also come a long way: observe the achievements of DARPA contractor Boston Dynamics. Embodiment is crucial to real-world intelligence and these achievements are impressive.

[None of this] has to do with Yudkowsky's Harry Potter fanfics, and so much the better. Whether you find such things repulsive is another issue. Infeasible? No. In fact, your essays reek of deep-seated fear that these things will come to pass.

Användarvisningsbild
NeuraltNätverk
Avstängd
Inlägg: 6039
Blev medlem: lör 04 jul 2009, 23:30
Ort: in der Bunkeranlage

Re: Tio saker transhumanister misslyckas med att förstå

Inlägg av NeuraltNätverk » fre 09 aug 2013, 05:30

Der Kampf geht weiter.
"Since you have dismissed some of the highest profile figures associated with the actual public delineation of what many people call "the transhumanist project" like Kurzweil and Yudkowsky it is hard to know what the phrase actually means to you"

I'm an atheist, too. I don't agree with everything Richard Dawkins says about evolutionary psychology—some of it seems quite ridiculous—and I thought Sam Harris' book The Moral Landscape was a load of tosh. Bertrand Russell and Carl Sagan were soft-hearted to a fault, and so is Neil DeGrasse Tyson today.

Does that mean I am not an atheist?

All you're showing here is that you can't think beyond a set of stereotypes. I am not a stereotype, and you are incapable of seeing it. That's no fault of mine.

"The Superlative Summary addresses MANY other futurological figures, many of them explicitly transhumanist-identified. Maybe you dismiss all of them as well?"

I'd like to know what you have to say about Alan Turing or F.T. Marinetti.

"your investment in serially failed AI dreams"

DARPA wanted a mechanical quadruped in the Vietnam era. Do you think they got it? No, but BigDog exists today. Huge amounts of progress has been made on the embodiment issue, as well as in a renewed focus on general learning mechanisms in AI. There is no doubting the sort of progress that has been made. And, news flash: "GOFAI" is generally considered ridiculous by practitioners. You're at least ten years late at this point.

"This is my blog -- in which I have delineated an extremely detailed, careful, extended critique to which you are responding with one-liners and ignorant pot-shots."

Spare me. You're like virtually every other critical theorist I've ever come across: all style, zero substance. In your case, complete with ridiculous strung-together phrases like "genetic prosthetic cognitive enhancement" which betray your utter ignorance of the technical subject matter in question.
"This is discourse analysis of a discourse that exists"

Right so, summing up, because some transhumanists have apparently advocated "hyper-consumerism", geo-engineering, greenwashing, determinism (oh no! not determinism!), etc., etc., etc. ad nauseum, then no progress is being made in (embodied) artificial intelligence and it will just be a pipe dream forever and ever. Any marginally competent engineering team could have built BigDog, PETMAN, Crusher or any of those others around the time of the Tet Offensive. Nothing to see here. Move on. Move on, I said!

You really do seem frightened.

Användarvisningsbild
NeuraltNätverk
Avstängd
Inlägg: 6039
Blev medlem: lör 04 jul 2009, 23:30
Ort: in der Bunkeranlage

Re: Tio saker transhumanister misslyckas med att förstå

Inlägg av NeuraltNätverk » fre 09 aug 2013, 06:57

"Yes, I'm oh so very skeered of the sooper-techno-future your fandom is building in your secret lab."

It seems quite difficult to believe that bloviation of this quantity and intensity is driven only by contempt. You are more obsessed with transhumanism than many transhumanists, myself included. You seem to be, for whatever reason, pissed off that some people—and, yes, it is happening; we both know this—are "playing God".

You can have whatever opinion you like about it but that has nothing to do with feasibility, something you continue to fail to understand.

Skriv svar