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

[Samantha Atkins]

On 09/01/2011 02:40 AM, Stefano Vaj wrote:
> On 31 August 2011 18:55, Adrian Tymes <atymes at gmail.com 
> <mailto:atymes at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>     > If anyone cares about marketing transhumanism in the present, we
>     > should quit talking about destructive uploading.  It is a really
>     > distasteful and (to my way of thinking) stupid way to upload when
>     > there are conceivable options that provide a path to reversible
>     > uploading as slick as boiling a frog.
>
>     Which options would those be?
>
>
> i) Coming from "wet" transhumanism, I developed a keen interest on its 
> "hard" side when I joined the actual movement, but basically in the 
> nano-bio-info-cogno equation the bio variable is going to remain very 
> central for a very long time, IHMO.

Personally I want to replace biological components of my body with 
non-biological alternatives as fast as good alternatives exist and I can 
legally (or successful black market) and financially do so.

>
> ii) Also in the way of autocriticism, we may have been insisting a 
> little too much on life-extensionism and survival - something which is 
> perhaps wrongly perceived as the most popular and less threatening 
> part of our discourse - and a little too little on human enhancement, 
> which seems after all to mobilise at least an equal interest.
>

I agree with that.  And cyborgization is a very very big deal.  Our 
phones for instance are effectively enhancements.  Note that the 
authorities claim the right to effectively lobotomize us or perform mind 
rape as they prohibit these enhanchements from being used in various 
places or ways or turn off the service if inconvenient to them or to 
pacify us.  And they take the devices from us and use them to witness 
against us without any such niceties as probable cause or search 
warrants.  The battle lines are being drawn and they are very important.

> Sure, "uploads" would serve in principle both purposes, but for the 
> latter a fyborg - which is by far the lower hanging fruit - would work 
> equally well.
>

Not to be confused with feyborgs.  :)

- samantha

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110901/cb1a7f8c/attachment.html>