Glad to see you are back. I hope your time away was fruitful.
"However, if there are indeed obvious benefits to cybernetic modification of human tissue, as almost by definition there would be as that is the point of it, cultures that discourage the practice would be forced to compete without these unnatural advantages against those who have embraced them."
After the success (cough cough) of the gene editing jabs, and the revelations form Jonathan Couey about biology and gain of function, I no longer fear the cyborgs. I imagine like repeated jabs most augmentation will reduce one's life span. I imagine Musk's neuralink will act more like a tumor. I suspect the distant future will be less about high tech, and more focus on the magic of the body.
Jan 6, 2023·edited Jan 6, 2023Liked by John Carter
Fascinating prediction, I loved the descriptions of progress. Hahahaha!
I do n't agree with your assessment of peasants, they had a varied diet and knew how to take care of themselves, as thus, were eliminated when possible, You are typing about serfs slaving in the fields. There wouldn't be any other plant-based food crops without the peasants, please make a mental note to research this more thoroughly.
My other point of contention is technology in this higher form requires way more brain energy than otherwise and a healthy body is required to produce a healthy brain. Machines won't be able to repair themselves.
I don't have a smartphone and own a camp with no electricity supplied. You make points about everyone, well, maybe, you make a point about degrees of participation, well, the machines will need someone to repair them.
Most of my time is used thinking about and growing food, hunting and fishing, so although I loved the stack, I think you are coming in from a skewed towards progressing technology idealism from my perspective.
Again: Machines won't be able to repair themselves and humans suffering such atrophy overtime at some point won't be able to repair the machines either, if that's all the humans there are its over.
Those people adapting to machines will just go away, those that stubbornly hold on to healthy living will note their passing briefly.
Welcome back, warlord of Barsoom. Your voice has been dearly missed.
Much to grapple with here. Will comment in depth when I reach dry land. My initial thoughts concern directionality: are the blade, flame and word what make us human? Or are they outward expressions of that humanity, born from the ineffable substance of our state of being? In other words, do these technologies in their external handmade forms merely align by pattern with innate interior qualities, like the shadows in the cave?
Nice to see you back. You are a brain cell challenge. My thouggts. Fact is, we really can't do space travel unless we assimilate. Biological creatures deteriorate so Borging up will be natural. Empty space is too far.
The next question will be whether or not the brain can keep working without the biology breaking down. It also whithers on the tree of life.
I suppose sending egg and sperm, creating biology and then borging up about 20 years out from destination, might work. Of course any civilization we encounter would assume we are warlike.
And having an idiot that can punch through concrete walls would be pretty dangerous for people living in towers. But fun to watch take a few billionaire house down.
I guess this whole exercise is finding a way to extend human life.
The entire concept appears to be superficial. Personally, I believe the answer is spiritual, more than physical. That is where we should be looking. Travelling by thought would be instantaneous. It might not appear like an invasion.
I think it's useful to keep teleology in mind when talking about inevitable futures and technological developments. That is, there are certain final "forms" into which humankind can grow, and must grow, but it's not just one. This gives me hope that we can diverge from the Borg path. If not as a species, then perhaps as a subgroup of the species. When I look back at the development of technology, especially since the last 100+ years, it strikes me that while progress had been inevitable, the nature of it hasn't. So many technologies seem almost forced on us without our wanting it, which to me indicates that our present is not the result of an unshakable law of "what can be done, will be done" but more of "if on a certain trajectory, this trajectory will be completed, unless we pull off some non-linear intervention which changes it". Or, more likely really, smashes the playing field to create a new trajectory...
Jan 6, 2023·edited Jan 6, 2023Liked by John Carter
John, I am very sorry to hear of your loss. These things are very difficult emotionally...it is the price we pay for attachment and the strength of our relationships. I can assure you that things will get better.
Reading your views on the price paid for technical advancement, I was put in mind of the anarcho-primitivist John Zerzan, especially his very short book FUTURE PRIMITIVE (available in full at https://files.libcom.org/files/FuturePrimitive.pdf). Zerzan is an anarchist and at one stage was the FBI's lead suspect in the Unabomber case. His work touches many of the themes that you have raised. Zerzan is the Rousseau of our age: he is convinced that civilization has ruined our species and makes his case with considerable intellectual force.
While I am not an anarchist (I agree with Freud that repression is a price worth paying for civilization but would freely acknowledge that the price is often very high at a personal level) I'd recommend Zerzan for his insights and observations.
Re body modification, the present fashion appears as an attempt at reclaiming a sense of ownership/agency/control. The strength of this trend suggests that people are becoming unsettled at a subconscious level by living in a regime of escalating control.
Holy Banth John! Where you been? I thought the Commie Canuks had given you the shot to end all shots. It was either that, or Justin Castro had targeted you as a ne'er do well, and closed out your bank account. Now back to reading your latest screed.
I tend to agree with William Hunter, I don't think we are anywhere near what your describing. The jab has been an epic fail and they are still discovering what it can and can't do, with huge gaps completely unknown. "Science" has no idea how most of our biological systems work. Eventually they will but I don't see it happening anytime soon. That said, great to have you back! Seriously-I was getting worried. Yes Canada sucks, I'm stuck here too, it is depressing. Sorry to hear about your loss and struggles. Hang in there.
Everyone loves to complain about how math skills are declining. While they certainly are, verbal skills may be falling at an even faster rate. I work as a tutor, and I am constantly astounded at vocabulary loss in particular. If my students are typical, your average college bound 16 - 17 year old doesn’t know what “dismayed”, “omit”, “satiated”, or “lucid” mean.
As you point out, language is one of the things that makes us uniquely human. Our culture's complete disinterest in the Word is troubling.
"Some animals, such as dogs and apes, are able to learn to associate some relatively small number of individual sounds with their symbolic meanings, suggesting that the connection between sound and sense is likely universal in the social mammals, but there is little evidence that they are in any way sensitive to the grammar of human language"
I had dumped a pile of laundry on my bed for folding. I started matching socks, which finished with 1 unmatched. I muttered to myself, "I must've dropped it. I'll look for it after I finish folding." and started folding t-shirts. I barely noticed Jake, my lab-x, leave the room.
He returned a couple moments later. Carrying the missing sock.
I cannot remember all the times he demonstrated he fully understood what I had just said.
Animals lack the jaw structure to speak complex language. We really don't know how much human language they understand when they've been exposed for s long time.
African Grey parrots not only can learn large #s of words & their associated meanings, as the famous Alex demonstrated, they can learn to use a "pidgen" grammar.
Even more impressive (imo) than speaking in simple sentences, Alex invented new "names" for special things. The example I always remember is brazil nuts, which he renamed "rock crackers."
And ime there are other, nonvocal, ways to communicate.
By way of comparison, how many animal languages have humans learned?
1) Is it really an efficiency to plant technological enhancements in the body? As it stands, we are supreme generalists, and our power comes largely from our ability to use special tools and then put them down, rather than carry them around with us beyond their immediate need. Would becoming cyborgs not effectively be a step back, in the direction of other species, whose tools are part of their bodies, that we have already surpassed in power?
2) To what extent do all of our recent "advances" in technology depend specifically on the availability of fossil fuels and rare minerals? Are we about to run out of these for widespread use? If so, are we not rather about to drop to a manual level of technology more comparable to that employed by our pre-industrial ancestors than to what would be needed for sophisticated robotic prostheses?
3) If cyborg technology is both useful and supportable, will it be for everyone? In the article, different competitive communities are supposed, each using a certain standard of technology, and each in competition with others having a different standard. But isn't it more likely that the different standards of technology will be tuned to fit separate niches within an economic society? Thus, truckers get cyborgized in one way to suit their job, secretaries in another, different types of soldiers each in their respective ways, while many others, including managers, might not need any. Each niche would be its own field of competition, and would eventually select its humans into separate species, whether cyborgized or not.
Welcome back. Really missed you, but what a grand essay with which to greet us upon your return. Such an interesting subject with both frightening and intriguing possibilities. I fear the desire to be god-like will overcome circumspection and ethical concerns and we will rush head-long into the disaster of unintended consequences, no matter how well-meaning we intend to be.
Years ago, I read Ray Kurzweil's The Singularity is Near. He argues that the exponential pace of technological progress will lead to the Singularity, in which artificial intelligence will surpass human intelligence and fundamentally alter the course of human history. Kurzweil predicts that the Singularity will occur in the 2030's and that it will bring about enormous changes in society, including the possibility of extending human lifespan indefinitely. He also discusses the potential risks and benefits of this development, and how humanity can prepare for and shape the Singularity to benefit all of mankind.
I don't have much confidence that to whatever degree of advancement in the merger of humans and AI that comes about, it will be used benevolently and ethically. The potential for grave error is just too high, and certain types of people will use it to elevate themselves and their group above the masses over whom they will subjugate and rule. Some things never change.
1. This was the theme of the original Star Trek series going back to the first pilot episode. Star Trek portrays a future where humans control incredibly powerful technology yet remain fully human. Notice the lack of robots on board the Enterprise. The only human built AI portrayed is the ship computer it is pretty passive -- except in the episode where they get an experimental upgrade which proceeds to destroy several other starships. Note also that medicine is not that far advanced. McCoy is still just a country doctor. Human lifespan is roughly what it is today, and two episodes portray bad results from attempting to extend human lifespan: "Miri" and the one with the Yangs and the Comms. And, of course, there was a historical incident involving eugenics which left people leery centuries later.
2. Jack Vance portrays a future in which humans remain human. He's most explicit in "The Demon Princes" where there is a shadowy technological elite -- The Institute -- which intentionally thwarts attempts to take technology in certain directions. I think we may need something like it.
3. To that end, there are actions worth taking today to keep humans in charge of the machines. For starters, it's high time we replace the QWERTY keyboard with something that's both more ergonomic and easier to learn. Voice control technology is dangerous. Likewise we need a good one handed keyboard for use with TV remotes to eliminate the demand for voice control. I will not buy a "smart" TV.
Personally, I am not tempted at all by smart phones. After enjoying the progression from VT-52 monitors up to mutiple 1080p monitors hooked up to the same desktop, smart phones strike me as a huge step backwards. I would, however, appreciate a semi-smart phone which had a handset separate from the screen. Less frying of the brain with microwaves. Put the one-handed keyboard in the handset and now you have a proper miniature computer that also serves as a phone. No voice control needed.
Finally, I would note that the auto industry is pushing us into dependence on smart vehicles. Somewhere around the turn of the century they changed the steering gear ratio so you don't need to turn the wheel as far in order to make a sharp turn. This may be handy in city driving, but it's punishing when driving on the interstate. Throw in the designed-for-chimpanzees seating position and rear window in the previous county and of course, people are now yearning for auto-drive.
Maintaining technology which humans truly understand and control is important to both liberty and remaining human.
Glad to see you back was a little concerned, Have seen too many other bloggers disappear for no apparent reason was hoping this wasn't your case. Then again, maybe your were replaced ( Play the Twilight Zone theme ). Nah, can tell by the writing style you haven't been.
Glad to see you are back. I hope your time away was fruitful.
"However, if there are indeed obvious benefits to cybernetic modification of human tissue, as almost by definition there would be as that is the point of it, cultures that discourage the practice would be forced to compete without these unnatural advantages against those who have embraced them."
After the success (cough cough) of the gene editing jabs, and the revelations form Jonathan Couey about biology and gain of function, I no longer fear the cyborgs. I imagine like repeated jabs most augmentation will reduce one's life span. I imagine Musk's neuralink will act more like a tumor. I suspect the distant future will be less about high tech, and more focus on the magic of the body.
Fascinating prediction, I loved the descriptions of progress. Hahahaha!
I do n't agree with your assessment of peasants, they had a varied diet and knew how to take care of themselves, as thus, were eliminated when possible, You are typing about serfs slaving in the fields. There wouldn't be any other plant-based food crops without the peasants, please make a mental note to research this more thoroughly.
My other point of contention is technology in this higher form requires way more brain energy than otherwise and a healthy body is required to produce a healthy brain. Machines won't be able to repair themselves.
I don't have a smartphone and own a camp with no electricity supplied. You make points about everyone, well, maybe, you make a point about degrees of participation, well, the machines will need someone to repair them.
Most of my time is used thinking about and growing food, hunting and fishing, so although I loved the stack, I think you are coming in from a skewed towards progressing technology idealism from my perspective.
Again: Machines won't be able to repair themselves and humans suffering such atrophy overtime at some point won't be able to repair the machines either, if that's all the humans there are its over.
Those people adapting to machines will just go away, those that stubbornly hold on to healthy living will note their passing briefly.
Welcome back, warlord of Barsoom. Your voice has been dearly missed.
Much to grapple with here. Will comment in depth when I reach dry land. My initial thoughts concern directionality: are the blade, flame and word what make us human? Or are they outward expressions of that humanity, born from the ineffable substance of our state of being? In other words, do these technologies in their external handmade forms merely align by pattern with innate interior qualities, like the shadows in the cave?
More later. Thanks for getting back in the game.
Nice to see you back. You are a brain cell challenge. My thouggts. Fact is, we really can't do space travel unless we assimilate. Biological creatures deteriorate so Borging up will be natural. Empty space is too far.
The next question will be whether or not the brain can keep working without the biology breaking down. It also whithers on the tree of life.
I suppose sending egg and sperm, creating biology and then borging up about 20 years out from destination, might work. Of course any civilization we encounter would assume we are warlike.
And having an idiot that can punch through concrete walls would be pretty dangerous for people living in towers. But fun to watch take a few billionaire house down.
I guess this whole exercise is finding a way to extend human life.
The entire concept appears to be superficial. Personally, I believe the answer is spiritual, more than physical. That is where we should be looking. Travelling by thought would be instantaneous. It might not appear like an invasion.
Welcome back, John!
I think it's useful to keep teleology in mind when talking about inevitable futures and technological developments. That is, there are certain final "forms" into which humankind can grow, and must grow, but it's not just one. This gives me hope that we can diverge from the Borg path. If not as a species, then perhaps as a subgroup of the species. When I look back at the development of technology, especially since the last 100+ years, it strikes me that while progress had been inevitable, the nature of it hasn't. So many technologies seem almost forced on us without our wanting it, which to me indicates that our present is not the result of an unshakable law of "what can be done, will be done" but more of "if on a certain trajectory, this trajectory will be completed, unless we pull off some non-linear intervention which changes it". Or, more likely really, smashes the playing field to create a new trajectory...
John, I am very sorry to hear of your loss. These things are very difficult emotionally...it is the price we pay for attachment and the strength of our relationships. I can assure you that things will get better.
Reading your views on the price paid for technical advancement, I was put in mind of the anarcho-primitivist John Zerzan, especially his very short book FUTURE PRIMITIVE (available in full at https://files.libcom.org/files/FuturePrimitive.pdf). Zerzan is an anarchist and at one stage was the FBI's lead suspect in the Unabomber case. His work touches many of the themes that you have raised. Zerzan is the Rousseau of our age: he is convinced that civilization has ruined our species and makes his case with considerable intellectual force.
While I am not an anarchist (I agree with Freud that repression is a price worth paying for civilization but would freely acknowledge that the price is often very high at a personal level) I'd recommend Zerzan for his insights and observations.
Re body modification, the present fashion appears as an attempt at reclaiming a sense of ownership/agency/control. The strength of this trend suggests that people are becoming unsettled at a subconscious level by living in a regime of escalating control.
Holy Banth John! Where you been? I thought the Commie Canuks had given you the shot to end all shots. It was either that, or Justin Castro had targeted you as a ne'er do well, and closed out your bank account. Now back to reading your latest screed.
I tend to agree with William Hunter, I don't think we are anywhere near what your describing. The jab has been an epic fail and they are still discovering what it can and can't do, with huge gaps completely unknown. "Science" has no idea how most of our biological systems work. Eventually they will but I don't see it happening anytime soon. That said, great to have you back! Seriously-I was getting worried. Yes Canada sucks, I'm stuck here too, it is depressing. Sorry to hear about your loss and struggles. Hang in there.
Everyone loves to complain about how math skills are declining. While they certainly are, verbal skills may be falling at an even faster rate. I work as a tutor, and I am constantly astounded at vocabulary loss in particular. If my students are typical, your average college bound 16 - 17 year old doesn’t know what “dismayed”, “omit”, “satiated”, or “lucid” mean.
As you point out, language is one of the things that makes us uniquely human. Our culture's complete disinterest in the Word is troubling.
Thank you for your contribution to my higher level brain function. I had lost it over the last 3 years.
As I watched it deteriorate, I knew death was on the horizon.
I think I can think again, so thank you for giving me the juice to do it.
I'm sorry for your loss. I'm glad you made it through it.
Please continue to add to our ability to conjure higher levels of existence.
Welcome back Carter!
"Some animals, such as dogs and apes, are able to learn to associate some relatively small number of individual sounds with their symbolic meanings, suggesting that the connection between sound and sense is likely universal in the social mammals, but there is little evidence that they are in any way sensitive to the grammar of human language"
I had dumped a pile of laundry on my bed for folding. I started matching socks, which finished with 1 unmatched. I muttered to myself, "I must've dropped it. I'll look for it after I finish folding." and started folding t-shirts. I barely noticed Jake, my lab-x, leave the room.
He returned a couple moments later. Carrying the missing sock.
I cannot remember all the times he demonstrated he fully understood what I had just said.
Animals lack the jaw structure to speak complex language. We really don't know how much human language they understand when they've been exposed for s long time.
African Grey parrots not only can learn large #s of words & their associated meanings, as the famous Alex demonstrated, they can learn to use a "pidgen" grammar.
Even more impressive (imo) than speaking in simple sentences, Alex invented new "names" for special things. The example I always remember is brazil nuts, which he renamed "rock crackers."
And ime there are other, nonvocal, ways to communicate.
By way of comparison, how many animal languages have humans learned?
I think it's time for a repost of this:
https://i.imgur.com/hINj1xf.png
On the inevitability of cyborgization:
1) Is it really an efficiency to plant technological enhancements in the body? As it stands, we are supreme generalists, and our power comes largely from our ability to use special tools and then put them down, rather than carry them around with us beyond their immediate need. Would becoming cyborgs not effectively be a step back, in the direction of other species, whose tools are part of their bodies, that we have already surpassed in power?
2) To what extent do all of our recent "advances" in technology depend specifically on the availability of fossil fuels and rare minerals? Are we about to run out of these for widespread use? If so, are we not rather about to drop to a manual level of technology more comparable to that employed by our pre-industrial ancestors than to what would be needed for sophisticated robotic prostheses?
3) If cyborg technology is both useful and supportable, will it be for everyone? In the article, different competitive communities are supposed, each using a certain standard of technology, and each in competition with others having a different standard. But isn't it more likely that the different standards of technology will be tuned to fit separate niches within an economic society? Thus, truckers get cyborgized in one way to suit their job, secretaries in another, different types of soldiers each in their respective ways, while many others, including managers, might not need any. Each niche would be its own field of competition, and would eventually select its humans into separate species, whether cyborgized or not.
Welcome back. Really missed you, but what a grand essay with which to greet us upon your return. Such an interesting subject with both frightening and intriguing possibilities. I fear the desire to be god-like will overcome circumspection and ethical concerns and we will rush head-long into the disaster of unintended consequences, no matter how well-meaning we intend to be.
Years ago, I read Ray Kurzweil's The Singularity is Near. He argues that the exponential pace of technological progress will lead to the Singularity, in which artificial intelligence will surpass human intelligence and fundamentally alter the course of human history. Kurzweil predicts that the Singularity will occur in the 2030's and that it will bring about enormous changes in society, including the possibility of extending human lifespan indefinitely. He also discusses the potential risks and benefits of this development, and how humanity can prepare for and shape the Singularity to benefit all of mankind.
I don't have much confidence that to whatever degree of advancement in the merger of humans and AI that comes about, it will be used benevolently and ethically. The potential for grave error is just too high, and certain types of people will use it to elevate themselves and their group above the masses over whom they will subjugate and rule. Some things never change.
Several thoughts:
1. This was the theme of the original Star Trek series going back to the first pilot episode. Star Trek portrays a future where humans control incredibly powerful technology yet remain fully human. Notice the lack of robots on board the Enterprise. The only human built AI portrayed is the ship computer it is pretty passive -- except in the episode where they get an experimental upgrade which proceeds to destroy several other starships. Note also that medicine is not that far advanced. McCoy is still just a country doctor. Human lifespan is roughly what it is today, and two episodes portray bad results from attempting to extend human lifespan: "Miri" and the one with the Yangs and the Comms. And, of course, there was a historical incident involving eugenics which left people leery centuries later.
2. Jack Vance portrays a future in which humans remain human. He's most explicit in "The Demon Princes" where there is a shadowy technological elite -- The Institute -- which intentionally thwarts attempts to take technology in certain directions. I think we may need something like it.
3. To that end, there are actions worth taking today to keep humans in charge of the machines. For starters, it's high time we replace the QWERTY keyboard with something that's both more ergonomic and easier to learn. Voice control technology is dangerous. Likewise we need a good one handed keyboard for use with TV remotes to eliminate the demand for voice control. I will not buy a "smart" TV.
Personally, I am not tempted at all by smart phones. After enjoying the progression from VT-52 monitors up to mutiple 1080p monitors hooked up to the same desktop, smart phones strike me as a huge step backwards. I would, however, appreciate a semi-smart phone which had a handset separate from the screen. Less frying of the brain with microwaves. Put the one-handed keyboard in the handset and now you have a proper miniature computer that also serves as a phone. No voice control needed.
Finally, I would note that the auto industry is pushing us into dependence on smart vehicles. Somewhere around the turn of the century they changed the steering gear ratio so you don't need to turn the wheel as far in order to make a sharp turn. This may be handy in city driving, but it's punishing when driving on the interstate. Throw in the designed-for-chimpanzees seating position and rear window in the previous county and of course, people are now yearning for auto-drive.
Maintaining technology which humans truly understand and control is important to both liberty and remaining human.
Glad to see you back was a little concerned, Have seen too many other bloggers disappear for no apparent reason was hoping this wasn't your case. Then again, maybe your were replaced ( Play the Twilight Zone theme ). Nah, can tell by the writing style you haven't been.