The extinction of the human race

stormlord · #1 06-09-2010, 06:42 PM

The arguemnt that we would be helpless if the nanobots died because our immune system wouldn't know what to do is the same kind of argument that we would be helpless if our electrical grid shutdown, our computers shut off, and we had to live off the land. Look, we will always have vulnerabilities. Always.

You can't eliminate failure. All we can do is move forward. Once we can program the body ourselves and guide evolution directly, the importance of natural evolution will lose some of its value. At that point in time, people won't be so judgmental because the evidence will be straight in front of them.

Making hypothetical arguments, like what would we do if armageddon happened and suddenly we had to depend on our natural genetics, are spurious at best. There're many cases where, if we had to do it ourselves, we would fail (catastrophically). What would happen if the computer chips on a spaceship failed and the astronaut had to guide the spacecraft manually? It would crash or burn. People aren't capable of piloting a spacecraft manually without computer assistance because extremely precise calculations and movements are required. So if a human was forced to pilot it, they would have already failed, so there's no point to make. People aren't always the answer. We're feeble and there're many tasks we cannot perform well at all.

And the earth only has a 100 million human carrying capacity. If we lost our technology, billions would perish in the aftermath due to lack of food and water. We exist BECAUSE of technology, not because we're doing things naturally. If we were, most of us wouldn't exist. And not because we didn't know how to do it ourselves.

Case in point, I likely wouldn't be alive if I had been born 100 years ago. I was 3 months premature.

Besides, if we had to live in the stone age again, I'd rather be dead anyway.

Taxi · #2 06-09-2010, 07:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stormlord [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

The arguemnt that we would be helpless if the nanobots died because our immune system wouldn't know what to do is the same kind of argument that we would be helpless if our electrical grid shutdown, our computers shut off, and we had to live off the land. Look, we will always have vulnerabilities. Always.

You can't eliminate failure. All we can do is move forward. Once we can program the body ourselves and guide evolution directly, the importance of natural evolution will lose some of its value. At that point in time, people won't be so judgmental because the evidence will be straight in front of them.

Making hypothetical arguments, like what would we do if armageddon happened and suddenly we had to depend on our natural genetics, are spurious at best. There're many cases where, if we had to do it ourselves, we would fail (catastrophically). What would happen if the computer chips on a spaceship failed and the astronaut had to guide the spacecraft manually? It would crash or burn. People aren't capable of piloting a spacecraft manually without computer assistance because extremely precise calculations and movements are required. So if a human was forced to pilot it, they would have already failed, so there's no point to make. People aren't always the answer. We're feeble and there're many tasks we cannot perform well at all.

And the earth only has a 100 million human carrying capacity. If we lost our technology, billions would perish in the aftermath due to lack of food and water. We exist BECAUSE of technology, not because we're doing things naturally. If we were, most of us wouldn't exist. And not because we didn't know how to do it ourselves.

Case in point, I likely wouldn't be alive if I had been born 100 years ago. I was premature by 3 months.

But like i was saying, the more forward we move with technology, the higher the risk. Im not a luddite, i understand technology can be a good thing. But right now youve got insanity like designing plants that dont produce seeds just so you can sell the seeds to a farmer instead of him getting his seed from the plant each year. They even named the technology the terminator technology, and it can pollenize other crops and contaminate them. You dont find that kind of technology troubling in the least?

Playing with our bodies like that is not just like putting on glasses to correct vision. It is in a way, but it has to be done in a responsible way, if youre playing with genes without caring about consequences just for a quick buck, thats a really scary thought to me. It comes back to the unchecked greed i was talking about in my first post, unchecked greed gives us oil spills, unchecked greed could be the end of us. Thats what im more afraid of, not really the tech itself but what unscrupulous individuals would do with it.

Omnimorph · #3 06-10-2010, 06:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Taxi [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

But like i was saying, the more forward we move with technology, the higher the risk. Im not a luddite, i understand technology can be a good thing. But right now youve got insanity like designing plants that dont produce seeds just so you can sell the seeds to a farmer instead of him getting his seed from the plant each year. They even named the technology the terminator technology, and it can pollenize other crops and contaminate them. You dont find that kind of technology troubling in the least?

Playing with our bodies like that is not just like putting on glasses to correct vision. It is in a way, but it has to be done in a responsible way, if youre playing with genes without caring about consequences just for a quick buck, thats a really scary thought to me. It comes back to the unchecked greed i was talking about in my first post, unchecked greed gives us oil spills, unchecked greed could be the end of us. Thats what im more afraid of, not really the tech itself but what unscrupulous individuals would do with it.

Exactly, it has to be wielded with responsibility!

Technology can be used to further mankind's evolution, or impede it.

pickled_heretic · #4 06-10-2010, 10:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Omnimorph [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Technology can be used to further mankind's evolution, or impede it.

Evolution isn't some sort of enthalpic process which always tends to higher states of order. Evolution is simply a mathematic equation, a law of biology. If the environment demands that homo sapiens become a simpler organism to survive, then so be it, and technology is just one way that humans interact with their environment.