This is somewhat humorous in that legitimate use of bitcoin as a currency is in the same futuristic article as human organs reproduced by 3D printers, brain-net replacing internet, and artificial intelligence.
Actually, in my world, two of these are already happening. We have printed human parts with 3D printers, now working on rejection and sub micron structures of complicated organs and tissues. One promising avenue of research is to grow the different tissues from stem cells and apply the tissue to printer produced collagen "frames". Parts containing collagen, the basic building block of connective tissues and pliable structures (ears, etc) have already been successfully built using 3D printers and implanted experimentally. As for artificial intelligence, kindly define "artificial" Computer intelligence is at a point where it could be argured that machines can reason but not yet think. Is that intelligence? Perhaps not quite there yet but, close. The "brain-net" thing is still kinda "out there" but, you never know who's working on it!
Somehow the future arrived when I wasn't looking.
I guess being involved in bitcoin, takes the futuristic feel out of it for me, but I did like what he said about it."He believes we can expect a gradual progression from Internet to the ‘brain-net’. He describes it as a mental network where thoughts, emotions, feelings and memories will be instantly sent over the entire world. Scientists will be able to connect our brain to a computer and decode thoughts and memories." Can you imagine?? Not only will I have to watch what I say, I will have to watch what I think!
p.s. Your work is very impressive.
When that happens, we BECOME the thinking machine. I'm not so sure I want to see that come to fruition in my lifetime but, I suspect the reasons are not in our best interest. We can let that one be for now. As for my work, I have been very fortunate to have been in the right places at the right times with the right knowledge. I still consult in fields I have been involved with in the past and agencies/clients that know me from those days. It keeps life interesting.
Very interesting conversation, I know it's slightly outside the scope of Digital Currency, but it does sound like RJF has some experience in this field, possibly from an IT angle? It's a fascinating field, and you wouldn't be the only IT expert to be working or consulting in it - example: Aubrey De Grey.
I have read and done a little study about people like Google's Ray Kurzweil singularity - where computers will be able to download human thoughts within thirty years, with a possibility to transfer consciousness, although I'm not certain it would work (is the new consciousness you? does the old one still exist?). I once thought I'd dedicated my life to research in this field - I wanted to tackle the problem from a different angle - to use biotechnology to prevent human senescence, or ageing. So far the only successful known means to slow the ageing process is severe calorie restriction diets - which I think leads to low quality of life and sever hunger. Nearly nobody sticks to it. I was very interested in these technologies, and very in the affirmative for their adoption (personal) - despite having many questions for what a world without ageing would be:
What would inter-generational relationships look like? There would be no giving way to the next generation from father to son, mother to daughter. Surely the meaning of life changes when children are no longer dependent on the parents, and the parents not dependent on children in older age. People could put off having children until 200... 500... and live many lives, through many marriages, but how much can be achieved in one, two, three, ...ten lifetimes?
‘a time of coming of age; a time of flourishing, ruling, and replacing of self; and a time of savouring and understanding, but still sufficiently and intimately linked to one’s descendants to care about their future and to take a guiding, supporting, and cheering role.’ - Leon Kass
Genetic imperialism - only the most wealthy would afford to 'enhance' themselves genetically, whether mentally (IQ) or physically.
Subjective definition of 'therapy' and 'enhancement' - does there exist a moral distinction between a situation where a person with a natural IQ of 80, is 'genetically enhanced' to have an IQ of the standard ~100, and somebody with a mental disability that has a current IQ of 120, but 'therapeutic' measures could take them to their natural IQ level of 150?
What would 'human' values look like in such a future? Would "genetically ameliorated" (IQ, ageing etc) humans develop higher level moral value system and subjugate humans who rejected the technology, just like that Bruce Willis movie? It's fair to say that we might not currently be in favour of post-human values, but that is likely because we aren't yet acquainted with them.
There arises a paradox with prolonged life and retarded senescence in that: the more that has been achieved in one's lifetime, combined with the ability to live to 'old' age having identical physical ability to your youth, that the desire to prolong death would be further exacerbated.
I also think that mankind would be prone to "cruising" - living life as if there is always tomorrow, removing the time constraint within which normal humans would strive to get things done. This 'strive' to succeed, is part of what makes us human in my view. Overpopulation would mean people would have to sign contracts to not have children, and agree to 'die', in order to allow new life to be born. Perhaps these consciousnesses could be uploaded to computers to not consume world resources, but still exist?
Suffice to say, I'm not so sure about it any more! Uploading all human knowledge to the cloud seems really interesting, so does living forever, and improving ourselves genetically to be 'superhuman'. As I learned more, my personal opinion became convoluted - human improvement ideals refuse to accept the giftedness of life, and post-human cognisance will skip the realm of intellectual meaning. If we had computer enhanced brains, we would have no claim to our journey towards a more enlightened state - without thriving and striving, what would it mean to be human? or should we live in a 'post-human' world and accept it?
Oops got a bit excited didn't I? I do think some of the concerns can be applied to all new technologies, including the Blockchain.
Too much thinking for me, I should get back to my slightly less thought intensive, and interesting marketing and law economics assignments... it was a nice study break!
I'm not sure I would want to live in such a world. Ageing and dying are the great equalizers. They are the only things that bring us all to the same level, rich, poor, powerful or slaves, we all end up in the same place sooner or later. But what is that place? What is death? I tend to see it as a transition not an end. I'm not deeply religious but I was raised that way and still maintain those values so, the romantic in me says "there must be more to it" and the scientist in me says "game over".
I truly believe there is more to it. What, I can't say but, there are so many possibilities. Do we really know what we are? Simply a biological collection of systems and nerve impulses capable of interacting with others of our species and able to effect our environment at will? Or, how about a temporary repository for a totally different kind of universal intelligence that transcends time and space unaffected by life and death as discussed here? Do we really know ourselves?
Well, we won't know till we go now will we? And no one so far has been able to enlighten us after the fact. Or is it that we just aren't listening? Perhaps when they activate the great "brain net" all the questions will be answered, I really hope not, it would spoil the game.
Time for bed. Lets get back to discussing DNotes, this heady stuff makes me tired. Reality, wow! What a concept!
