Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Lewdog
    Offline

    Lewdog Come ova here and give me kisses! Supporter Contributor

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2012
    Messages:
    7,530
    Likes Received:
    2,825
    Location:
    Williamsburg, KY

    Living on Through Robotics

    Discussion in 'Debate Room' started by Lewdog, Nov 11, 2013.

    Dmitry Itskov is a rich Russian tycoon who has assembled an 'A-team' of scientist in order to find a way to transfer a person's 'mind' to a machine where the person can live on through robotics. This means a person's personality, memories, feelings, and consciousness would live on in the body of a robot! Sounds crazy doesn't it? Immortality through robotics! The question is, do you find it ethical? What if someone made a robot with the mind of killers? How would you deal with people that were robots?

    Personally I think mortality is what makes humans who they are. Imagine how much different you would live if you knew you wouldn't die. The idea of this happening actually scares me. I originally saw this on Joe Rogan's new television show, but here is an article about it.

    http://www.zmescience.com/research/technology/transfer-human-mind-robot-2045-immortality-053543/
     
  2. GingerCoffee
    Offline

    GingerCoffee Web Surfer Girl Contributor

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2013
    Messages:
    17,604
    Likes Received:
    5,877
    Location:
    Ralph's side of the island.
    I would do it if AI were possible, but it isn't yet.

    Pass the popcorn.
     
  3. Lewdog
    Offline

    Lewdog Come ova here and give me kisses! Supporter Contributor

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2012
    Messages:
    7,530
    Likes Received:
    2,825
    Location:
    Williamsburg, KY
    That's the point, this guy is willing to spend as much money as it takes to make it happen, and he is a billionaire. It's not just a plot for a Sci-Fi novel or movie anymore.
     
  4. thirdwind
    Offline

    thirdwind Contributing Member Contest Administrator Reviewer Contributor

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2008
    Messages:
    7,351
    Likes Received:
    2,891
    Location:
    Boston
    I wouldn't do something like this. The one thing I've learned is that machines are unreliable. Random crashes, freezes, you name it. You get a drop of water in the wrong place, and it's game over. There are a ton of other reasons, but in the interest of time I won't go into them right now.
     
  5. GingerCoffee
    Offline

    GingerCoffee Web Surfer Girl Contributor

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2013
    Messages:
    17,604
    Likes Received:
    5,877
    Location:
    Ralph's side of the island.
    If all that was needed for AI was a billion or two, it would happen. But it hasn't.
     
  6. Lewdog
    Offline

    Lewdog Come ova here and give me kisses! Supporter Contributor

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2012
    Messages:
    7,530
    Likes Received:
    2,825
    Location:
    Williamsburg, KY

    You're right, every scientist should just give up in innovation and testing, as a human race we have reached our ceiling. :rolleyes:
     
  7. ChickenFreak
    Offline

    ChickenFreak Contributing Member Contributor

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2010
    Messages:
    8,967
    Likes Received:
    5,491
    Ghostbusters, Winston Zeddemore: "If there's a steady paycheck in it, I'll believe anything you say."

    The fact that scientists are prepared to accept money to attack this problem doesn't mean that the science has reached the point where the problem can be solved. I'm sure that they'll learn all sorts of valuable things, but I very much doubt that they'll actually achieve the goal within the lifetime of the billionaire.
     
  8. GingerCoffee
    Offline

    GingerCoffee Web Surfer Girl Contributor

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2013
    Messages:
    17,604
    Likes Received:
    5,877
    Location:
    Ralph's side of the island.
    Do you know what a non sequitur is?
     
  9. ChickenFreak
    Offline

    ChickenFreak Contributing Member Contributor

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2010
    Messages:
    8,967
    Likes Received:
    5,491
    Proximity doesn't really make problems simpler. Also, there is, IMO, a substantial difference between trying to describe something, and trying to create it. They're essentially trying to create the human mind. We may not be that far from imitating simple human interaction using robots, but actually creating a human mind in a computer, and then transferring a real human consciousness into that computer? I think that's very, very far away, if it's even possible.
     
  10. Lewdog
    Offline

    Lewdog Come ova here and give me kisses! Supporter Contributor

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2012
    Messages:
    7,530
    Likes Received:
    2,825
    Location:
    Williamsburg, KY

    We can already connect nodes to nerves and use impulses from the brain to move prosthetic limbs. Have you kept up with the activity of science and dealing with the brain? It's pretty darn amazing.

    This guy is talking about doing this by 2045 which is now 32 years away. Do you know how long it took the United States to fulfill President Kennedy's mission to put a man on the moon? A task that people thought was unthinkable? Kennedy promised the nation the U.S. would be the first to have a manned moon landing in 1961. Neil Armstrong stepped foot on the moon in 1969. Think about that a minute. Now tell me again that this idea and time frame isn't plausible. Seriously.
     
  11. ChickenFreak
    Offline

    ChickenFreak Contributing Member Contributor

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2010
    Messages:
    8,967
    Likes Received:
    5,491
    That's mechanics. How does the brain decide that it wants to move its prosthetic limb to punch the button on the remote to watch Notting Hill rather than the Superbowl? What makes it fall in love with the brain next door? Where do we put the circuits that cause it to take pleasure in watching the sweep of a vintage evening gown? How about the circuits that allow it to write the next best-selling murder mystery?

    We're not talking about creating servant robots with convincing pseudo-human behavior. We're not talking about improving prosthetic limbs. We're talking about transplanting human consciousness.
     
  12. Lewdog
    Offline

    Lewdog Come ova here and give me kisses! Supporter Contributor

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2012
    Messages:
    7,530
    Likes Received:
    2,825
    Location:
    Williamsburg, KY
    ...and we are talking about doing it over the next 32 years, not tomorrow. Once again, if you take into account the advances in science over the years and how long they have taken, how can you be so pessimistic about this happening? I don't like the idea of it, but I'm not going to sit back with my hands folded in my lap saying it isn't going to happen. If you told someone in 1900 that in the next 36 years humans would be beaming a video and sound signal into space and back down to earth onto a television somewhere, they would have told you that you were crazy, but we did it.
     
  13. ChickenFreak
    Offline

    ChickenFreak Contributing Member Contributor

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2010
    Messages:
    8,967
    Likes Received:
    5,491
    I'm confused now. You said that you were worried about this, but you describe my judgement that it's unlikely as pessimism. Does that mean that you do want it to happen?

    But for me, I'm going to do my worrying about things that seem more likely to happen. My worrying capacity is limited.
     
  14. A.M.P.
    Offline

    A.M.P. People Buy My Books for the Bio Photo Supporter Contributor

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2013
    Messages:
    2,030
    Likes Received:
    1,127
    Location:
    A Place with no History
    Dammit, immortality is going toward the robotics path.
    Sigh, will you humans ever learn?
    Immortality is only truly possible through the flesh.

    Considering the speed of technological advancement we had over the last 100 years or so, it wouldn't be outworldly to think we might be capable of the impossible.
    However, I guarantee that robotic immortality will not bring what everyone imagines it to be.
    A digital imprint of a human would be more satisfactory and that's not saying much.
     
  15. Cogito
    Offline

    Cogito Former Mod, Retired Supporter Contributor

    Joined:
    May 19, 2007
    Messages:
    35,935
    Likes Received:
    2,043
    Location:
    Massachusetts, USA
    So your question boils down to, "Doctor Frankenstein, pro or con?"
     
  16. Lewdog
    Offline

    Lewdog Come ova here and give me kisses! Supporter Contributor

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2012
    Messages:
    7,530
    Likes Received:
    2,825
    Location:
    Williamsburg, KY

    I think this a little more than that. We have been playing Frankenstein for years, first with donor organs from other humans, then other animals, and finally artificial ones. This is about becoming a prolonged sentient being beyond the point of the death of our God given body. Then you have to wonder, if ethics doesn't step in at some point, what is to stop scientist from growing cloned younger bodies at whatever age we want to keep living over again and simply transplanting us to a new one whenever we want or need to be? Then you could have pedophiles with the mind of a 200 year old walking around in the body of a 8 year old, the same athlete just reliving his prime years over and over again, or a dictator who will never die. Where do you draw the line?
     
  17. Aled James Taylor
    Offline

    Aled James Taylor Contributing Member Contributor

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2013
    Messages:
    784
    Likes Received:
    462
    Location:
    UK
    I think the far grater ethical issue is to do with the people who would say 'No'. Suppose there was a patient who was in need of a kidney transplant, would you be willing to live in a society where someone could say 'No, you can't have that life saving operation because I don't believe in it'. In time, new technologies will emerge, allowing new things. I'd rather live in a world where we learn to deal with new things as they come, not try to stop them because of our 'knee-jerk' emotional reaction to unfamiliar ideas.
     
  18. Cogito
    Offline

    Cogito Former Mod, Retired Supporter Contributor

    Joined:
    May 19, 2007
    Messages:
    35,935
    Likes Received:
    2,043
    Location:
    Massachusetts, USA
    No. To date we have never transplanted a human brain into a virtually invulnerable vessel. That is more or less what happened in the Frankenstein novel, but with the additional wrinkle of bringing that brain back to life (sans soul?)
     
  19. Lewdog
    Offline

    Lewdog Come ova here and give me kisses! Supporter Contributor

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2012
    Messages:
    7,530
    Likes Received:
    2,825
    Location:
    Williamsburg, KY

    Frankenstein had several parts. The difference of transplanting his brain, he didn't have the memories from the brain. Now Steve Martin on the other hand...
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page