Musk says humans must become cyborgs to stay relevant. Thoughts....

[rebellatio 25]

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/technology/2017/feb/15/elon-musk-cyborgs-robots-artificial-intelligence-is-he-right

[greenclaydog 6]

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/technology/2017/feb/15/elon-musk-cyborgs-robots-artificial-intelligence-is-he-right

 

I'm not sure that he means in the literal sense of half machine or part machine.

 

But more of a computer interfacing with the brain, assisting us with things such as memory, thinking, motor skills etc.

 

The list goes on.

 

However, i see a endless opportunity for abuse for this kind of technology, and no way to keep it from abuse.

[pr1v 36]

Thoughts....: We'll be hacked

[OpenSourcerer 1441]

I see a future where our brain is partly connected to a storage-like computer chip to enhance memory capabilities and avoid forgetting in general. We'd lose our humanity. But it's definitely coming. With all its negative sides.

[greenclaydog 6]

I see a future where our brain is partly connected to a storage-like computer chip to enhance memory capabilities and avoid forgetting in general. We'd lose our humanity. But it's definitely coming. With all its negative sides.

 

All dictators with a hard on for control would cream their collective pants at the idea. 

 

And with literal control over our minds, we would be powerless to stop it. Our only power in the matter is the refusal of this technology's introduction. 

[Ricnvolved1956 51]

I'm not necessarily positive and optimistic by nature. Having said that, I'm not convinced this will be the humanitarian disaster some think it could be. Think about it-- If you could go back in time say, a hundred years ago, and told people in the most general terms about computers and the internet, I think it's safe to assume that most if not all would be pretty freaked out. (Mary Shelley's "Frankenstein" was rooted in fear of technology and the negative use of such.) The point is that technology, and its inevitable advancement, isn't inherently a bad thing. It always comes down to the intent and purpose it's used for.

[Blade Runner 4]

The Borg live!

 

 

Resistance is futile. 

[greenclaydog 6]

I'm not necessarily positive and optimistic by nature. Having said that, I'm not convinced this will be the humanitarian disaster some think it could be. Think about it-- If you could go back in time say, a hundred years ago, and told people in the most general terms about computers and the internet, I think it's safe to assume that most if not all would be pretty freaked out. (Mary Shelley's "Frankenstein" was rooted in fear of technology and the negative use of such.) The point is that technology, and it's inevitable advancement, isn't inherently a bad thing. It always comes down to the intent and purpose it's used for.

 

True, however i would somewhat disagree. The advancement of technology is indeed inevitable 

 

But, that being said, every time a new technology has been capable of both bad and good things, it is typically used for both at one point or another. 

 

Think about it, one man splits the atom for power and electricity to better the lives of all people, the other splits the atom in hopes of killing as many people as he can all because "Japs are bud Americka gud!" 

 

This is even applicable to the "Internet of things" we are currently experiencing at this very moment. Sure, we can watch content from all over the world, communicate instantly to anyone on Earth, learn how to do just about anything with the online wealth of information that spans the entire planet. But as we all know, this tool for good has become a weapon of surveillance and espionage by several, if not all governments on Earth, as well as using major political outlets to misinform and divide their people into supporting their various agenda's, which i would argue are slowly making our differences ever so slowly irreconcilable.

 

It's not so crazy to think that a visionary such as Elon Musk would want to see brain-interfacing technology used to better peoples lives, help their memories, make them smarter etc. While a dictator in a far (or not so far *cough* USA *cough*) away land would see this as an opportunity to oppress entire countries of people and at the same time make any resistance absolutely impossible by any and all means. 

 

This level of control over hundreds of millions, maybe even billions of people i daresay would be worse than any atomic bomb we have ever dropped and worse than and Artificial Intelligence we could ever conceive.

 

Elon Musk is consistently worried about the threat of Artificial Intelligence, but he should focus on the even bigger threat he himself is so anxious to develop, which has gone without any public criticism.

[OpenSourcerer 1441]

 

I see a future where our brain is partly connected to a storage-like computer chip to enhance memory capabilities and avoid forgetting in general. We'd lose our humanity. But it's definitely coming. With all its negative sides.

 

All dictators with a hard on for control would cream their collective pants at the idea. 

 

And with literal control over our minds, we would be powerless to stop it. Our only power in the matter is the refusal of this technology's introduction. 

 

Really? You refuse NSA's practices, aren't you? Does it help yet?

We're already in the game, there is no refusal. The only way is action, not such passive nonsense. Working actively against disruptors. Even if it means breaking open the code of such technology, rewrite it if necessary to better suit the interests of those it's designed for.

[greenclaydog 6]

 

 

I see a future where our brain is partly connected to a storage-like computer chip to enhance memory capabilities and avoid forgetting in general. We'd lose our humanity. But it's definitely coming. With all its negative sides.

 

All dictators with a hard on for control would cream their collective pants at the idea. 

 

And with literal control over our minds, we would be powerless to stop it. Our only power in the matter is the refusal of this technology's introduction. 

 

Really? You refuse NSA's practices, aren't you? Does it help yet?

We're already in the game, there is no refusal. The only way is action, not such passive nonsense. Working actively against disruptors. Even if it means breaking open the code of such technology, rewrite it if necessary to better suit the interests of those it's designed for.

 

I could, theoretically unplug and never use the internet, but it would only serve to inhibit my ability to access information. 

 

And i do refuse the NSA's practices. As much as possible given today's current circumstances, that's why I'm here in the first place

 

And i do agree that if this tech is ever used for malicious intent, we should recode and repurpose much in the same way we do with VPN technology and Tor today.

 

What i am suggesting, is that such recoding and repuroposing will be just as inevitable as the introduction of malicious intent.

 

Believe me, I'm not exactly the "head in the sand" type, otherwise i would still be using my naked ISP and screeching "Noting to faer noting to hide cirminal scum!" 

 

EDIT: Post 200, Yay!