The problem with the idea of “playing god” is that every century our idea of playing god changes. Right now we are afraid of GMO, nanotech, and other technology. 100 years ago we were afraid of something many other things, but now we look back and think we were being silly.
Hundreds of years ago we thought working on cadavers to learn about the body was wrong and scary. Luckily we did not listen to them.
The future is always uncertain, but if dynamic changed produced good things and progress along with the upsets, then it will continue to. We cant’ say “dynamic and decentralized change has been good up until now” but many people do, in fact, believe it. But it’s either good or bad. You can’t control progress or predict beforehand what breakthroughs will change our lives. So much of what has changed the world was discovered by accident, such as Maxwell’s equations.
Basically, someday we’ll look back and think our fears were silly, because the changes came and we adjusted to them and were better off because of it.[/quote]
The problem with the idea of “playing god” is that every century our idea of playing god changes. Right now we are afraid of GMO, nanotech, and other technology. 100 years ago we were afraid of something many other things, but now we look back and think we were being silly.
Hundreds of years ago we thought working on cadavers to learn about the body was wrong and scary. Luckily we did not listen to them.
The future is always uncertain, but if dynamic changed produced good things and progress along with the upsets, then it will continue to. We cant’ say “dynamic and decentralized change has been good up until now” but many people do, in fact, believe it. But it’s either good or bad. You can’t control progress or predict beforehand what breakthroughs will change our lives. So much of what has changed the world was discovered by accident, such as Maxwell’s equations.
Basically, someday we’ll look back and think our fears were silly, because the changes came and we adjusted to them and were better off because of it.[/quote]
Good point. haha doesn’t mean I’m any more for it though.
I don’t want anything with more than Read-Only access messing with my brain if other humans were more than tangentially involved with its development. Drugs are cutting it close, but if someone can code Alzheimer’s into it, I’m not touching it.
[quote]Magarhe wrote:
The worst thing about any extended life through these means is that, eventually, you are going to die in a terrible accident. Eliminating all disease and aging, accidents are what will get you.
I don’t know about you guys, but I’d rather die peacefully in my sleep like my grandpa. Not screaming in terror like his passengers.[/quote]
Pussy. You’ll be cool if you die in an accident.
“Hey man, how’d your grandpa die?”
“Aww dude, he flipped his 'Vette. Going like 120 in a 40.”
[quote]on edge wrote:
The humans would probably be just pets for the robots. After all, soon we will be making computers that are “smart” enough to design computers that are even smarter. With each generation getting smarter. When that happens it will just be a matter of time before computers achieve conciousness and far surpass us. If we are lucky we can program in a “prime directive” for the computers to save and cultivate organic life.
[/quote]
My first thought after reading this post was that, if humans ever invent robots that complex, and they discover how to reproduce themselves, then someone will code Asimov’s three laws of robotics into them for shits and giggles and all of robotics will be destroyed in one giant, vast, existential, logic-fail.
[quote]Otep wrote:
on edge wrote:
The humans would probably be just pets for the robots. After all, soon we will be making computers that are “smart” enough to design computers that are even smarter. With each generation getting smarter. When that happens it will just be a matter of time before computers achieve conciousness and far surpass us. If we are lucky we can program in a “prime directive” for the computers to save and cultivate organic life.
My first thought after reading this post was that, if humans ever invent robots that complex, and they discover how to reproduce themselves, then someone will code Asimov’s three laws of robotics into them for shits and giggles and all of robotics will be destroyed in one giant, vast, existential, logic-fail.[/quote]
Alternatively, some dick-wad will program an AI to calculate the meaning of life, the universe, and everything. Then, when no one is looking, she’ll write in code that by-passes the traditional logic program to deliver the answer ‘42’. The world will split into two camps- one who thinks Douglas Adams was a savant, and one who thinks the robot somehow discovered a way to get really, really drunk- and go to war.
[quote]Otep wrote:
Otep wrote:
on edge wrote:
The humans would probably be just pets for the robots. After all, soon we will be making computers that are “smart” enough to design computers that are even smarter. With each generation getting smarter. When that happens it will just be a matter of time before computers achieve conciousness and far surpass us. If we are lucky we can program in a “prime directive” for the computers to save and cultivate organic life.
My first thought after reading this post was that, if humans ever invent robots that complex, and they discover how to reproduce themselves, then someone will code Asimov’s three laws of robotics into them for shits and giggles and all of robotics will be destroyed in one giant, vast, existential, logic-fail.
Alternatively, some dick-wad will program an AI to calculate the meaning of life, the universe, and everything. Then, when no one is looking, she’ll write in code that by-passes the traditional logic program to deliver the answer ‘42’. The world will split into two camps- one who thinks Douglas Adams was a savant, and one who thinks the robot somehow discovered a way to get really, really drunk- and go to war.[/quote]