|
The Guardian: ‘We will get regular body upgrades’: what will humans look like in 100 years? Mechanical exoskeletons, bionic limbs, uploadable brains: six experts’ visions of 2118: by Richard Godwin[^]Quote: But of all the developments emerging now, it’s technology focused on the human body that would appear to introduce the most chaos into the system. California biotech startups talk of making death “optional”. Facebook is working on telepathic interfaces. Bionic limbs will soon outperform human limbs. Crispr-Cas9 gene-editing technology theoretically allows us to fiddle around with genomes. We could look, think and feel in radically different ways.
Are we ready to treat our bodies as pieces of hardware? We might be getting there. Take something as innocuous as tattoos, which have boomed in popularity roughly in step with the information age. Seen in one light, they’re a faintly retro fashion trend. In another, they show an increased willingness to alter our physical selves. You might think of them as the surgeon’s marks before the real enhancements arrive. I asked six scientists and thinkers to share their vision for the body in the next century. I don't want to even get 80 (that's five years away, for me).
«Where is the Life we have lost in living? Where is the wisdom we have lost in knowledge? Where is the knowledge we have lost in information?» T. S. Elliot
|
|
|
|
|
BillWoodruff wrote: I don't want to even get 80 (that's five years away, for me).
I have to disagree. Assuming that we have true replacements for body parts (i.e. replacements that are as good as, and require as little maintenance as the originals), I don't see why I wouldn't want to live for a few centuries, if not forever.
It is makeshifts like today's transplant technology (with the possibility of rejection) that make replacement of body parts so onerous.
Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.
-- 6079 Smith W.
|
|
|
|
|
Daniel Pfeffer wrote: I don't see why I wouldn't want to live for a few centuries, if not forever. I doubt that such technology will ever go mainstream, for obvious reasons
Bastard Programmer from Hell
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
"If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
|
|
|
|
|
I agree, but it would be "nice to have"...
Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.
-- 6079 Smith W.
|
|
|
|
|
No, it is not.
Go to an elderly home and hear them complain how everyone they knew, family, friends, people on TV, are dead. You imagine it to be nice, but it probably would be quite the opposite.
Bastard Programmer from Hell
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
"If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
|
|
|
|
|
But then... they wouldn't be dead anymore, would they now?!
|
|
|
|
|
They would. Immortality for the masses is never going to happen; like cancer-cells we'd be growing harder than resources would allow.
Bastard Programmer from Hell
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
"If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
|
|
|
|
|
Them "researchers" been playing too much Rimworld.
Bastard Programmer from Hell
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
"If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
|
|
|
|
|
Modern day Frankenstein's, all of them!
Latest Article - A Concise Overview of Threads
Learning to code with python is like learning to swim with those little arm floaties. It gives you undeserved confidence and will eventually drown you. - DangerBunny
Artificial intelligence is the only remedy for natural stupidity. - CDP1802
|
|
|
|
|
I'm in!
Keep your friends close. Keep Kill your enemies closer.
The End
|
|
|
|
|
Without available, affordable developers, even the best conceptual projects are forced to stay on the backburner, and companies that might otherwise be incentivized to explore the new possibilities of the technology are forced to lay in wait. Thankfully, we may be nearing the end of this massive, industry-spanning shortage. "If you hype something and it succeeds, you're a genius, it wasn't hype; if you hype it and it fails, then it's just a hype."
|
|
|
|
|
|
We've all seen them on news websites, at the bottom of pages or lurking in side bars, those 'Promoted stories' with cheesy headlines like, 'What she looks like now will amaze you!' The other 20% must be running ad blockers
Alternate blurb: Those who dislike them, also dislike long walks in bogs, and liver&onions.
Really though, what's up with the other 20%?
|
|
|
|
|
Firms in competitive industries are often seen as cutthroat and intense places to work. But while the work might be intense, the employees tend to trust and cooperate with each other, according to a study published Wednesday in Science Advances. If you know someone's going to stab you in the back, you can trust them?
|
|
|
|
|
Kent Sharkey wrote: If you know someone's going to stab you in the back, you can trust them?
Good snark, but it tends to be the opposite; places where everyone "gets along" are typically wretched hives of scum and villainy.
|
|
|
|
|
Competitive places where people "cooperate with each other"?
Competition is the "other thing".
Bastard Programmer from Hell
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
"If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
|
|
|
|
|
Kent arguably miss-titled his post; the article concerned competitive industries. In short, it found that meritocracies tend to lead to respect among competitors.
|
|
|
|
|
The bug, which is thought to impact "all supported Windows version[s], including server editions," is unpatched at the time of writing. Well it is the database engine for Access
|
|
|
|
|
Suddenly, we’re looking at voice-first everything — including the voice-first workplace. "Talking, talking. It doesn't matter what the people all around you say. Talking, talking It doesn't matter What the people All around you say. "
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: Companies are focusing now on consumer smart speakers because the business models require harvesting personal data for the purpose of improving personalized advertising and Amazon buying recommendations.
Once again proving that my NSA Test is a valid mechanism for determining if a new piece of tech should be allowed into my life or smashed with a hammer without ever being powered on. It's a very simple test too that anyone can do.
1) Summarize the tech in a simple sentence. "Always on internet connected microphone."
2) Would the above cause a professional privacy violator to celebrate with unholy glee? " yes!"
3) If the answer to 2 is positive, the tech fails and should be destroyed.
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, weighing all things in the balance of reason?
Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful?
--Zachris Topelius
Training a telescope on one’s own belly button will only reveal lint. You like that? You go right on staring at it. I prefer looking at galaxies.
-- Sarah Hoyt
|
|
|
|
|
I couldn't agree more.
|
|
|
|
|
In research recently published in Science Advances, the group reports on a method for spraying invisibly thin antennas, made from a type of two-dimensional, metallic material called MXene, that perform as well as those being used in mobile devices, wireless routers and portable transducers. Can I make it look like bunny ears?
|
|
|
|
|
To quote Homer Simpson: Think unsexy thoughts. Think unsexy thoughts.
|
|
|
|
|
This article is on how I could write a 3D engine using only excel formula "The answer to ANY problem is an Excel spreadsheet"
Yes, not new (it's from February), but it was new to me, and didn't look like it had been posted before.
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: In a business environment, using formula rather than macro is :
Faster to write for anyone but professional analyst programmer
Easier to maintain for anyone but professional analyst programmer. (while macro are mostly unusable once the initial developer is gone)</blockquote>
Gotta disagree here. Once you go beyond simple calculations into Things Which Should Not Be Done in Excel, macro's are much less opaque than formulas. At a previous job I needed to implement run length encoding in a spreadsheet to generate an output. (For anyone unfamiliar, RLE would turn a sequence like 0001011 into 3 zeros, 1 one, 1 zero, 2 ones, ) The reasons for doing it in a spreadsheet and as formulas not VBA amounted to the above quoted. (Why this was needed doesn't matter at all other than legacy system with a limited input format.) In code this would be really simple to do and could be heavily documented via comments to the point that anyone with a quasi-engineering/engineering background (the other people who'd be seeing my work) could follow along. Excel formula's don't allow any sort of inline commenting, and the result was so opaque that even a week later I needed to refer back to the assorted StackOverflow questions I used to generate it in the first place to have any idea what it did because while the formulas worked they were the most cryptic unreadable crap I'd ever coded.
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, weighing all things in the balance of reason?
Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful?
--Zachris Topelius
Training a telescope on one’s own belly button will only reveal lint. You like that? You go right on staring at it. I prefer looking at galaxies.
-- Sarah Hoyt
|
|
|
|