Recent comments in /f/singularity

br0kenhack t1_j4i1c52 wrote

Reply to What void are people trying to fill with transhumanism? by [deleted]

Smart phones are a primitive step towards transhumanism, they’re an external extension of ourself. They’re very powerful if used in a productive way and as most would probably agree they’re also detrimental in other ways. We’re definitely going to have some rocky adjustment periods, perhaps even a crisis. In this capitalist age the void that is mostly filled is increased productivity (so not really a void as much as an enhancement) and entertainment / social voids. For the future hopefully there are more constructive voids being filled, or similar voids being filled more constructively.

1

the-powl t1_j4hzjvm wrote

Reply to So wait, ChatGPT can code... But can't code itself? by Dan60093

What's being ignored in your idea is that ChatGPT itself doesn't consist of code. It's a large artificial neural network, trained on huge amounts of data. It's not an algorithm. The solution of the problem of making it better is not to throw more coding power onto it. Instead you need better concepts, more/better training data, huge amounts of computing time, more human feedback. You can't just take a "chunk of code" of the network and "improve it".

1

Evilsushione t1_j4hvfyz wrote

Reply to comment by AsheyDS in Does anyone else get the feeling that, once true AGI is achieved, most people will act like it was the unsurprising and inevitable outcome that they expected? by oddlyspecificnumber7

I'm sure like everything about life there are levels and probably no definitive line between sentience and not sentient. I don't know what level would be dangerous or if any would be dangerous. Maybe we can program in such a high respect for human life that it won't be dangerous at all. Maybe a high degree of empathy for humans, some kind of mothering instinct where they WANT to take care of us. But just remember a lot of mothers will still eat their young.

1

curloperator t1_j4hsjab wrote

Reply to What void are people trying to fill with transhumanism? by [deleted]

This is an incredibly condescending post. OP's entire flawed premise is based on thier assumption that they already know that everything is meaningless and people are empty or whatever edgelord nihilistic nonsense they are confusing with wisdom and enlightenment. This whole thread isn't really even about transhumanism, it's about the OP using transhumanists as a target to feel smug. Downvote and ignore this bullshit.

1

QLaHPD t1_j4hm72l wrote

Reply to Does anyone else get the feeling that, once true AGI is achieved, most people will act like it was the unsurprising and inevitable outcome that they expected? by oddlyspecificnumber7

What is AGI actually, ppl usually say "an AI that can do everything a human can"; but to what degree, it need to be at least at human level in every task? Some humans are better in some things than others, yet we all are "AGIs". To me, AGI will be an AI that can make my personal, brain loss decrease without escaping from the distribution. It probably will require an BCI.

1

AsheyDS t1_j4hhl3y wrote

Reply to comment by Evilsushione in Does anyone else get the feeling that, once true AGI is achieved, most people will act like it was the unsurprising and inevitable outcome that they expected? by oddlyspecificnumber7

What if self-awareness had limits? We consider ourselves self-aware, but we don't know everything that's going on in our brains at any given moment. If self-awareness were curtailed so it was only functional, would it be as dangerous as you anticipate?

1

rixtil41 t1_j4hgli0 wrote

Reply to comment by [deleted] in What void are people trying to fill with transhumanism? by [deleted]

Not guaranteed but likely. Nothing in life in general is guaranteed things in general will likely be better in 2123. If your looking at "likely" in a negative view and it has to be perfect that's on you. You should be looking at the bigger picture and not have imperfection be the enemie of good. If you mean by earned that people should be going out of there own way for helping them selfs than yes. But if an opportunity arises so that they can help them selfs easier than it should not be invalid because it was made easier. If you still disagree that's fine but let's see if you still disagree in the year 2043. If it comes true, you will be in a world where everything in general is free, living in a simulation of your choice. If you still disagree if it comes ture then I'll be impressed but until then wait.

1

Uranusistormy t1_j4hdqlc wrote

Reply to comment by [deleted] in Breakthrough milestone in understanding the reversal of aging by duffmanhb

Well it's unfortunate that you have such a poor grasp of thermo despite spending 8 years working toward a PhD, but I guess you'd be the secon\\d idiot on reddit that I've seen arguing incorrectly about the thermodynamics of the cell. I suggest you go and review first year physical chemistry. You remind me of a clown similar to you over on r/biochemistry arguing against the other users about whether the cell is a closed system.It's also a little funny that you resort to insults because you get so easily flustered explaining your misunderstandings with poor analogies. No one is confusing the difference between metablism and ageing. However you seem to be confused about the difference between cell growth and ageing. Cells grown and maintain themselves. This requires free energy which is derived from the decrease of free energy in molecules like glucose, producing simpler CO2. This results in an increase in the entropy of the surrouning environment and a decrease within the cell. As cells age the ability of the cell to maintain itself decreases, barring senescence we don't know the precise mechanism of why, but it results in increased entropy within the cell. Eventually the cell is unable to maintain itself and dies afterwhich it rapidly increases in internal entropy to a point equivalent to it's surroundings.

,,iMpErfecT uPkeEp/mAinTEnance mEchaNisms'' occur because the cell increasingly loses its ability to resist the increase of internal entropy. That is ageing. That is quite different from growth and development which occurs, not because of dysregulation, but because of normal, regulated gene expression, with no notable change in internal entropy. I find it amazing that you think 'imperfect maintenance of the organism’s existing structures' lead to maturation from an infant to a teenager. And that normal growth is equivalent to a 40 year old growing into a 90 year old with liver spots and cancer.

If you would give a comparison like the development of larger muscles during puberty to the onset of diabetes or male pattern baldness then I could see where you're coming from and say that is probably an example of antagonistic pleiotropy but instead you liken it to hearing loss and back pain.

Here's a paper that discusses it further. I'm guessing you won't read cuz you seem like the type to only read you own research and laugh at your own jokes. Here's a notewrothy quote: "The mechanistic linkbetween entropy generation and pathogenesis has been confirmedin metabolic diseases (simple obesity, diabetes, metabolic hypertension".

And here's a list of other research showing the link between ageing and entropy.

You yourself said exactly what I've been trying to explain in your first comment:

>Aging is a product of imperfect upkeep/maintenance mechanisms.
>
>Entropy is why maintenance is required in the first place

Then you go on and contradict yourself repeatedly.

Actually it's also kinda funny you said 'entropy is disorder' in a debate while unironically calling yourself a scientist. Or that you described a closed system as only being able to maintain its internal entropy, when, by definition, it will maintain the same entropy or increase it. What a joke.

1

Lord_Thanos t1_j4hdmom wrote

Reply to What void are people trying to fill with transhumanism? by [deleted]

I don't like that the current way of one's life is entirely based on chance. Your intelligence is genetic, your looks are genetic, your personality is genetic in the fact that you will trend towards some personality(introvert/extrovert). Too many chains. It would be great to be able to have control over these things. Really the main one being intelligence.

>But really, I don't know what people expect. More status? More technical knowledge of the universe? VR simulations?

Status? That's a silly idea. More technical knowledge would be incredible.

>AI won't necessarily function in a way that actually leads anywhere that is ultimately worthwhile, and you could lose yourself in the process.

I don't know what you mean by this. It's a very vague and philosophy babble like statement. How do you know how AI will function? Lose myself in the process? What process?

>I actually sort of worry that a lot of people are out of touch with the genuine beauty of life, and that trying to fill that void with transhumanism is a little like people trying to fill that void with money and things

Another philosophy babblie like statement. What is the "geniune beauty of life"? What is the process for designating which things are beautiful and which are not? What is it to be "in touch" with the "geniune beauty of life" and how does it differ from being "out of touch" with the "geniune beauty of life"?

>if you increase your IQ to 10,000, what makes you think that will make it easier to ignore a fundamental meaninglessness?

I don't have a hard time doing it now. You just have to keep your mind occupied. Or you could simply rewrite the way your brain perceives these ideas. Make them a non issue.

>Either you "ascend" in your understanding and face the empty reality you're already running from with obviousness every day, or you placate yourself with VR delusions.

More philosophy babble.

>Everything you observe will be cheapened as it becomes more trivial with more and more intelligence. You'll solve problem after problem, but you might realize that there's no point to solving problems.

I don't see how what I observe can be "trivial". That's an odd adjective. I think you meant "every problem". Just because it's trivial does not make it cheapened. The point would be to gain a greater understanding. More knowledge. Of course I can only speculate. And there's no point to anything, yet we still do things.

​

Really this is all speculation and very general. I cannot know how some ai with millions of time more intelligence will perceive the wolrd. They won't even have the biological makeup of humans so I guess you can say for sure it will be vastly different.

1