Transhumanism - Debate on Safety, Feasibility, and Ethics - Nanomachines, son!

I noticed the prosthetic bone/joint section is somewhat short. Also while some of the sintered powder metal development is certainly interesting, I feel it is just one small aspect of a larger whole. Also I would caution against getting too excited about materials developments here. There is a somewhat checkered past to consider- metal on metal joints have caused massive class-action suits, metal-on-ceramic implants have had unexpected and devestating cases of the ceramics exploding a lot like damaged tempered glass can be. Even if the underlying research is rock solid, this leads to a lot more onerous regulation in this specific part of the field. I know of a ceramics manufacturer that has been implanting their materials in static applications for at least a decade now. Even without testing raising any concerns or red flags over multiple rounds of testing, they are just recently getting to the point where they can use this in joint replacements. That's not a bad thing either imho. I mention it only as a warning that what you read about today might take longer than expected to be reality.

3D Printing and Additive manufacturing has had a major increase in notability and popularity recently. While this does help drive down manufacturing costs, it is child's play compared to the type of machining in practice to make implants. For example a small-ish manufacturer had multiple rows of 5-axis machines back when a pair and tooling would have hit seven figures. The types of machinists they contract will pick up work for things like chip fabricators, instrument makers, or NASA when not making implants. I can tell you from handling a lot of their work product and tooling, it is unparalleled quality. It's also so expensive most hospitals won't even drop the money on their own specific tool kit, instead using ones provided by the manufacturer and shuttled from hospital to hospital.

One very cool thing that was at least partially inspired by all the recent 3D printing popularity is actually in imaging. For quite some time implants were sized a lot like shoes. You can go bigger or larger at a predetermined granularity, but the implants are not made for a specific patient. Now there are companies like Conformis who are able to take a CT image of the joint, integrate that into their manufacturer's G-code, and crank out a bespoke implant for a specific patient without effecting treatment timelines. From talking with people whose job is basically to coach doctors and be SMEs on specific implants, fitment is one of the major causes of complications or needing a revision down the road.
 
My question is, how far away are we from designer babies?

These Musk-esque weirdos will absolutely play god with human genes if they are able to. How long will it be until we see billionaires' children growing up to be extremely handsome 6'5 rugby playing Harvard grads?
Depends on what you consider under that term. A lot of desirable traits like intelligence are associated with many gene loci so it's hard to manipulate them all to get your desired results. They'll probably be able to choose hair color and eliminate monogenic diseases soonish but not complex traits like general intelligence, artistic ability, athleticism etc. Most human diseases are not monogenic so gene manipulation isn't close to eliminating disease entirely like some transhumanists claim.
 
How does your innate sense of awareness, that feeling you get when you wake up in the morning, move into this machine?
Yeah, "uploading your brain" is completely pointless unless it's your actual consciousness being moved.
A lot of people who are in favor of mind uploading don't think that continuity of consciousness is even a thing. They assume that they will just wake up as the same being.
reminds me of this comic: Whomp! - Pork Futures

tl;dr: there's an electronic copy made of the guy's mind but the guy himself is still in "meat space"
 
I noticed the prosthetic bone/joint section is somewhat short. Also while some of the sintered powder metal development is certainly interesting, I feel it is just one small aspect of a larger whole. Also I would caution against getting too excited about materials developments here. There is a somewhat checkered past to consider- metal on metal joints have caused massive class-action suits, metal-on-ceramic implants have had unexpected and devestating cases of the ceramics exploding a lot like damaged tempered glass can be. Even if the underlying research is rock solid, this leads to a lot more onerous regulation in this specific part of the field. I know of a ceramics manufacturer that has been implanting their materials in static applications for at least a decade now. Even without testing raising any concerns or red flags over multiple rounds of testing, they are just recently getting to the point where they can use this in joint replacements. That's not a bad thing either imho. I mention it only as a warning that what you read about today might take longer than expected to be reality.

3D Printing and Additive manufacturing has had a major increase in notability and popularity recently. While this does help drive down manufacturing costs, it is child's play compared to the type of machining in practice to make implants. For example a small-ish manufacturer had multiple rows of 5-axis machines back when a pair and tooling would have hit seven figures. The types of machinists they contract will pick up work for things like chip fabricators, instrument makers, or NASA when not making implants. I can tell you from handling a lot of their work product and tooling, it is unparalleled quality. It's also so expensive most hospitals won't even drop the money on their own specific tool kit, instead using ones provided by the manufacturer and shuttled from hospital to hospital.

One very cool thing that was at least partially inspired by all the recent 3D printing popularity is actually in imaging. For quite some time implants were sized a lot like shoes. You can go bigger or larger at a predetermined granularity, but the implants are not made for a specific patient. Now there are companies like Conformis who are able to take a CT image of the joint, integrate that into their manufacturer's G-code, and crank out a bespoke implant for a specific patient without effecting treatment timelines. From talking with people whose job is basically to coach doctors and be SMEs on specific implants, fitment is one of the major causes of complications or needing a revision down the road.
Additive manufacturing with DMLS and EBM is a very time-consuming process. IIRC, it is typical for a single part to take like 24 hours (well, that was true way back when the things were new, but I hear the new ones have shorter cycle times). However, it has the advantage of being able to do closed voids and latticed structures that would be very difficult to make by other methods. They've used the things to prototype race car and aerospace parts. The machines themselves, while perhaps cheaper than some of the really high-end CNC mills, are massive and expensive. An Arcam EBM machine is like a quarter of a million dollars and can just barely be moved around with an average-size forklift. A hobby 3D printer, it is not.

They're pretty damn sweet, though.


The finish of a part that comes out of an EBM machine tends to be VERY rough. I suppose you could do further precision machining to the surfaces of the parts in a CNC mill, but that would still leave the parts that the toolhead can't quite reach, in some cases. There's also blasting, I guess.

image - 2022-04-28T035806.480.png


That was actually advertised, essentially, as a feature for orthopedic implants, not a bug. The way they put it, the honeycomb lattices of titanium would act as scaffolds for bones to grow into, improving the rigidity of the interface between the implant and the tissues.

image - 2022-04-28T035952.537.png
image - 2022-04-28T035943.176.png
image - 2022-04-28T035923.533.png

You're 100% right, though. The adoption of new medical implants is a lengthy and complicated process.

@Drain Todger I wasn't invited? Rlly nigga?

Anyhow, has anyone read Blindsight?
No, I haven't. Looking at the wiki notes, are you bringing it up because of the Chinese Room aspect? Or something else?
I know of Blindsight and what it's about, but haven't quite read it, yet. It's pretty infamous for all the arguments people used to get into over it, I know that much.
 
No, I haven't. Looking at the wiki notes, are you bringing it up because of the Chinese Room aspect? Or something else?
The rather lovecraftian idea that the universe is ruled by Chinese rooms and us humans are basically dodos on an island in the middle of nowhere.
I feel like cosmic horror can work like milk and cereal with transhumanism. Do you have any suggestions I could read?
 
@Drain Todger I wasn't invited? Rlly nigga?

Anyhow, has anyone read Blindsight?
I know about the book and some concepts around it, and a little skimming... but not in detail - Seems like a good story conceptually and how it tries to explore the philosophical concept around consciousness and the frightening possibilities that it may be a liability, as well as the exploration of the economy of a cyberpunk dystopia. But I'm kind of in a love-hate relationship with it due to how much this author is very much another Harlan Ellison and redditor fans of this books littered any mention of it with iamverysmart takes.

The biggest peeve for me around this book is that the author claimed that this book is a 'real legit science!' *cites 100+ of papers* yet when you actually go and look at the papers that are cited... it doesn't exactly always support the argument and explanations used in the book and sometimes even contradict it. Although I can also see the cited papers as more of an 'inspiration'.... that is sadly due to author's ego is not framed in a more honest way. And the 'fans' are eating it up and using the book to sound pretentious.


It is very clear to me that a lot of characters are created with the purpose of exploring theme of consciousness that you feel sometimes that they're just plot devices and some depths are sacrificed for the theme. Having half of your brain severed to reduce seizures does not make you have 'less consciousness' in reality, the vampires are there to explore the concept of predatory superhuman 'philosophical zombies., and I don't really know how, say, multiple consciousness would improve linguistic abilities other than it being an exploration of having multiple consciousness - In fact I don't mind those things, science fiction is first and foremost fiction, and these elements are certainly utilized for the philosophical discussion the author wants to have. It's just a little criticism I need to say after seeing too many one-sided praises.

Now here's the topic of actual transhumanism itself :
I'm mostly a lurker here because I don't think I've got the most knowledgable takes to say - I don't condone or condemn it, but the unknown around it certainly caused me a lot of fear... e.g. We know very well that our human mind is imited, just like how animals mind seem limited to us and we think the way we do, due to the physical limitation in the brain.
And while we're dreaming about how superintelligent AI would think and if we can augment our brain power through future technology... therefore it means that our very perception to the world will be wildly different. Would post-human brain will still have any concepts like enjoyment or everything we enjoy now will become pointless monkey brain pleasure and would the universe stops being exciting to us at one point? What would post-human live for? Or our destiny ends up somewhere with no motivation left because we'd get 'too smart' for anything who knows... And it's scary to think where we'd end up


(That's remind me of the Fermi paradox itself, assuming aliens have managed to reach singularity, and if they were expansionists, we'd have been wiped out for now. So they're certainly not expansionists... The result of superintelligence likely ends on the different note)
 
Última edición:
I know about the book and some concepts around it, and a little skimming... but not in detail - Seems like a good story conceptually and how it tries to explore the philosophical concept around consciousness and the frightening possibilities that it may be a liability, as well as the exploration of the economy of a cyberpunk dystopia. But I'm kind of in a love-hate relationship with it due to how much this author is very much another Harlan Ellison and redditor fans of this books littered any mention of it with iamverysmart takes.

The biggest peeve for me around this book is that the author claimed that this book is a 'real legit science!' *cites 100+ of papers* yet when you actually go and look at the papers that are cited... it doesn't exactly always support the argument and explanations used in the book and sometimes even contradict it. Although I can also see the cited papers as more of an 'inspiration'.... that is sadly due to author's ego is not framed in a more honest way. And the 'fans' are eating it up and using the book to sound pretentious.


It is very clear to me that a lot of characters are created with the purpose of exploring theme of consciousness that you feel sometimes that they're just plot devices and some depths are sacrificed for the theme. Having half of your brain severed to reduce seizures does not make you have 'less consciousness' in reality, the vampires are there to explore the concept of predatory superhuman 'philosophical zombies., and I don't really know how, say, multiple consciousness would improve linguistic abilities other than it being an exploration of having multiple consciousness - In fact I don't mind those things, science fiction is first and foremost fiction, and these elements are certainly utilized for the philosophical discussion the author wants to have. It's just a little criticism I need to say after seeing too many one-sided praises.

Now here's the topic of actual transhumanism itself :
I'm mostly a lurker here because I don't think I've got the most knowledgable takes to say - I don't condone or condemn it, but the unknown around it certainly caused me a lot of fear... e.g. We know very well that our human mind is imited, just like how animals mind seem limited to us and we think the way we do, due to the physical limitation in the brain.
And while we're dreaming about how superintelligent AI would think and if we can augment our brain power through future technology... therefore it means that our very perception to the world will be wildly different. Would post-human brain will still have any concepts like enjoyment or it will become pointless monkey brain pleasure and would the universe stops being exciting to us at one point? What would post-human live for? Or our destiny ends up somewhere with no motivation left because we'd get 'too smart' for anything who knows... And it's scary to think where we'd end up


(That's remind me of the Fermi paradox itself, assuming aliens have managed to reach singularity, and if they were expansionists, we'd have been wiped out for now. So they're certainly not expansionists... The result of superintelligence likely ends on the different note)
Yeah, the book does have its faults and the author later admitted that some of the stuff in it was not up-to-date anymore and the whole vampires and useless consciousness aspect seemed a bit contrived.
Would've been better if it focused more on AI and humans with radically different brain structures.
I also think it would've been better if it was stated that consciousness is not useless from the get-go but rather becomes obsolete once you reach 'the singularity' as the earlier parts of the book implied
 
Atrás
Top Abajo