[ExI] destructive uploading was AI class (Eugen Leitl)

[Eugen Leitl]

On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 08:48:56AM -0700, Keith Henson wrote:

> That seems awfully dogmatic to me.  People who are 20 and reading this

People reading this list include me (1966) and you (1942), who
co-authored with Drexler in 1977. Looking back 30 years, and looking
at who's still working on machine-phase, what are your estimates
and you and me see http://nanomedicine.com/ like capabilities in
what is left of our lifetimes? The way things are going we're not
even going to get a cryosuspension by the time we need it. 
Which could be far sooner than either one of us care to speculate.

> list could well be here in 2100, they would only have to make it to
> 89.

Tell that to Sasha Chislenko, Hara Ra, Robert Bradbury and
dozens of people we knew but are no longer there.
 
> What makes you so certain that nanotechnology will not come into
> existence by the end of the century?  (Convince me, I would like to be
> convinced.)

I don't know what will happen by end of century. What
I do know is that none of it will be relevant for you and me
and most other people on this list (sadly, also no longer
spring chicken).

I have another hunch: there are probably less than 5 people 
reading this list who're 20 or below. You might wonder what
it indicates, and it's not merely email being a dead medium.

But, hey, it doesn't matter, as long as you can click the Facebook
"like" button, or upboat the orange-red.
 
> >> I know Hans Moravec proposed that decades ago and it became a
> >> pervasive meme, but it's an awful concept and a serious marketing
> >> burden for transhumanism.
> >
> > Doesn't affect cryonics, as this side of suspension process is
> > resurrection-agnostic.
> 
> I was not talking about cryonics.

Keith, I doubt you and I even get a shitty suspension. Hope I'm wrong, of course.

Machine-phase will happen eventually (unless things go seriously sour),
but unless you subscribe to an AI-driven Singularity, which is a particularly
pernicious cult for futurists to embrace, as it greatly enhances their
private, personal chances to encounter the information-theoretic Grim Reaper
not on our watch. Sorry.
 
> >> I have reasons to think it would be a lot harder than infiltrating the
> >> brain with nanotech monitoring posts and learning how to emulate it.
> >
> > It would be a lot harder since there isn't any medical nantechnology,
> > nor will there be any for anyone reading this message right now.
> 
> If anyone cares about marketing transhumanism in the present, we
> should quit talking about destructive uploading.  It is a really

In order to market you must first have a product. Unless you're
in the religion business. I'm not.

> distasteful and (to my way of thinking) stupid way to upload when
> there are conceivable options that provide a path to reversible

There are many conceivable options. Unfortunately, none of them
relevant to us reading these lines. You all can disagree. The obits
will tell us who's right soon enough.

> uploading as slick as boiling a frog.

-- 
Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a> http://leitl.org
______________________________________________________________
ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.ativel.com http://postbiota.org
8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A  7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE