We have to evolve synthetically To avoid our doom
semisentient.medium.com
We have to evolve synthetically To avoid our doom
1–10 of 33 posts
Re: We have to evolve synthetically To avoid our doom
#2In order to avoid our doom, we must grow distributed food forests inside towns and cities. Here's how to start now: https://youtu.be/AJCv7wIolwM
Re: We have to evolve synthetically To avoid our doom
#3There's a whole lot of conjecture here, and it's hard to take seriously with the capitalization errors. What the author seems to be getting at is transhumanism on a surface level. I think most of this article tracks: Sure, we could find a way to manipulate our own biological processes, but what does that look like in practice? Would it exacerbate or rectify our current social systems? Would there be significant ideological opposition to it? What would the long-term effects of that be psychologically? How will people work together when they're no longer the same people?
There are so many interesting questions to explore here, that I feel like a simple "yes or no" response to this is entirely ignoring the interesting issues that could arise from that. Or maybe I've been reading too many Frank Herbert novels...
Re: We have to evolve synthetically To avoid our doom
#4This is a pretty poor article. First of all, the title has nothing really at all to do with the content. Second, its extremely short, and third, superficial with no real substance and lots of keyword stuffing and presuppositions. "If we develop AGI this is how it will be followed by this and then that"
Re: We have to evolve synthetically To avoid our doom
#5Didn't Steven Spielberg make a movie about this?
Re: We have to evolve synthetically To avoid our doom
#6> Some researchers believe that humans will evolve or directly modify their biology so as to achieve radically greater intelligence.
As a technical matter, I don't think we know enough to go writing DNA libraries to start freebasing the code.
Then there are the barely-explored ethical vistas.
Patience. Think it through for a decade or three.
Re: We have to evolve synthetically To avoid our doom
#7> Some researchers believe that humans will evolve or directly modify their biology so as to achieve radically greater intelligence. As a technical matter, I don't think we know enough to go writing DNA libraries to start freebasing the code. Then there are the barely-explored ethical vistas. Patience. Think it through for a decade or three.
> I don't think we know enough to go writing DNA libraries to start freebasing the code.
True, but there's plenty of low-hanging fruit in areas like embryo selection, enough to increase population-level intelligence by several standard deviations.
Re: We have to evolve synthetically To avoid our doom
#8> Some researchers believe that humans will evolve or directly modify their biology so as to achieve radically greater intelligence. As a technical matter, I don't think we know enough to go writing DNA libraries to start freebasing the code. Then there are the barely-explored ethical vistas. Patience. Think it through for a decade or three.
> I don't think we know enough to go writing DNA libraries to start freebasing the code. True, but there's plenty of low-hanging fruit in areas like embryo selection, enough to increase population-level intelligence by several standard deviations.
Ah, yes, eugenics.
Considering that intelligence seems to be correlated with autism spectral disorders, and individuals with severe autism are in need of individual care for their entire lives, are you sure that's it's smart to optimize for raw intelligence?
Re: We have to evolve synthetically To avoid our doom
#9Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I don't think we know enough to go writing DNA libraries to start freebasing the code. True, but there's plenty of low-hanging fruit in areas like embryo selection, enough to increase population-level intelligence by several standard deviations.
Ah, yes, eugenics. Considering that intelligence seems to be correlated with autism spectral disorders, and individuals with severe autism are in need of individual care for their entire lives, are you sure that's it's smart to optimize for raw intelligence?
I think you have nothing to fear. I'm all in favor of breeding genetic disorders out of the species and there's a whole bunch we can eliminate before we get into murky ethical territory. Religion can bite me on this one.
But also, take a look around you. The species isn't going to optimize for intelligence. It's going to optimize for looks. That's just how we're wired. And that will destroy a lot of plastic surgeon jobs.
Re: We have to evolve synthetically To avoid our doom
#10Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ah, yes, eugenics. Considering that intelligence seems to be correlated with autism spectral disorders, and individuals with severe autism are in need of individual care for their entire lives, are you sure that's it's smart to optimize for raw intelligence?
I think you have nothing to fear. I'm all in favor of breeding genetic disorders out of the species and there's a whole bunch we can eliminate before we get into murky ethical territory. Religion can bite me on this one. But also, take a look around you. The species isn't going to optimize for intelligence. It's going to optimize for looks. That's just how we're wired. And that will destroy a lot of plastic surgeon j…
Yeah, let's do what we can to reduce genetic diversity, weeding out the bits of code that we don't understand. Never mind the rapidly changing climate. Sounds like a great plan.
edit: the comment about plastic surgery is really weird. Do you think that 90% of humanity is going to stop breeding just because they aren't as attractive as the other 10%? And who's paying for plastic surgery? From my understanding, it's that vain 10%...