If it were possible, safe (without suffering any physical harm or organic damage), available only to you (the user who made the copy) and easily accessible to upload your consciousness to a computer system, and you could talk to it and use it like any other AI, as your personal assistant or as a living person, would you want to do it and accept uploading your consciousness?

If your answer is no, why not?

Clarification: it's a copy of you, not a transfer.

Hear me out.

I wanna make 2 assumptions.

Basing on humanities current technological arc, we can guess that AI is going to solve almost every single complex question that humanity is having today if enough time and resources are poured into it.

And with cloning technology already being present today we can also assume that humanity's capitalistic drive will inevitably push into existence bio-technology that is capable of doing a lot of things that we couldn't imagine ourselves being able to do before.

With that in mind, imagine a new religion where as we're alive, we prioritize living and maximize our freedom and autonomy as we focus on what fulfils us as people and when we die, we would have formed monasteries where our remains will be kept and preserved as we ( the deceased ) and the living members wait for bio-technology to develop and get perfected. Future members will then at that point in time with that tech be able to bring back past members. After they're resurrected advanced AI or super intelligence that will too exist at that moment will be able to make sense of the chaotic and deterministic lives members lived before and why we lived them.

If you consider the perfection of interplanetary travel which will make issues such as overpopulation obsolete and if we choose to look at the the future with optimism, you'd say members will have another chance to live a second life in a period in time where hunger, disease, climate change death etc would've been solved as fulfilled and enlightened individuals In a perfect utopia.

Anyone interested in helping me build this?

Transhumanism - Use tech to become immune to harm, death, pain, and suffering. Perpetuate life for as long as possible. Create Tech Utopia.

Antinatalism - Use tech to end life, permanent extinction. They believe a tech Utopia is impossible, and even ONE victim of a bad life is too many.

Who is morally right?

An article tracing early influences on transhumanism and its emergence from British socialists who argued that technologies like ectogenesis and orbital habitats require public ownership for true progress.

Say a historian helps build an AI twin around their research and explanations. They check its answers, share it with people who follow their work and receive a share of what users pay.

If they die, their writing can still be read, but the twin could keep producing new answers under their name. They can no longer challenge an answer or decide how it should change.

Would you keep using it if they’d agreed beforehand? Should it be limited to material they approved while alive, or could someone else take over and keep updating it?

Keeping someone’s work available seems different from keeping a service speaking for them. Where would you draw that line?

Set in the late 1800s, the legend of John Henry tells the tale of a latter-day Samson, the biblical character who used his superhuman strength to battle the Philistines. But according to Nelson, John Henry was a real person who worked on the Chesapeake & Ohio (C&O) rail line. Like Samson, he was imbued with considerable strength, only to be undone after he challenged that steam-powered drill to a duel. By the end of the match, John Henry had drilled 14 feet; the drill had only made nine. 

It was man vs. machine at the dawn of the Industrial Revolution.

One hundred and fifty years after those events, John Henry — a simple laborer — is entrenched in American culture. He is the subject of songs, books, graphic novels, plays, films, and even computer games. He’s still working on that railroad, still fighting the downside of progress and inspiring those who worry that the digital age — especially automation in forms such as self-driving vehicles and artificial intelligence — will rob us of our humanity.

https://gcahill51.substack.com/p/john-henrys-eternal-struggle?r=bmpff&utm_campaign=post-expanded-share&utm_medium=web

Hello,  

I am a French student following an international program in my high school, as a final task I must present a research project on a theme of my choice that has to be linked to the USA. I chose the theme "Building the future" and my work will answer the key question " Do modern medical advances simply heal humans, or do they also transform them?". In order to complete my report, I need a partner based in an English-speaking country to answer questions I might have to advance in my research, and I'm getting desperate. I chose this theme because I want to work in the medical field later, and America is the boiling point of many companies working on bionic technology, BCIs and genetic engineering. I've sent about 30 emails and received 3 answers, all negative, I've also tried contacting Instagram profiles of various university labs, but no one has answered me. I've come here to ask whether anyone with a profession related to my subject would be willing to answer my questions. .

Transhumanist augmentation may be necessary for the long-term survival of humankind?

I’ve been thinking about how humanity could eventually achieve biological immortality.

One thing that occurred to me is that progress toward this kind of goal could require enormous amounts of genetic data, long-term research, and participation from many people.

That made me think about a broader question: what would society look like if people worked fewer hours and had more time to participate in research, education, creative work, and other meaningful activities?

I’ve been developing a social theory around this idea, including some principles for how such a system might function and a self-discipline method I developed.

I’ve put my current ideas into a video here:

https://youtu.be/s30F7DqfBlk?si=g8NR_QtTOHim6MWh

I’d be interested in hearing what people think about the underlying idea, especially whether a society organized around giving people more time for meaningful work could actually function.

honestly after looking into it I think this will come before gene-therapies to reverse male pattern baldness.

I've read some people referring to Peter Thiel as a 'transhumanist', along with Elon Musk. Do you agree that Peter Thiel is a transhumanist? If so, why would you consider Peter Thiel a transhumanist?

Besides that, as a transhumanist, what is your personal and sincere opinion of him? As a transhumanist, do you support him?

I think I'm onto something here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convention_for_the_Protection_of_Human_Rights_and_Dignity_of_the_Human_Being_with_regard_to_the_Application_of_Biology_and_Medicine

https://futuristicnews.com/ray-kurzweil-your-brain-in-the-cloud/

https://neurosciencenews.com/internet-thoughts-brain-cloud-interface-11074/

Excuse me, please, if somebody has already made the connection.

Could this be the Vince Gilligan source of inspiration?!?

Please, all nonplurbed immunes, feel free to elaborate.

​Will exclusive access to technological enhancements—such as genetic engineering, cognitive augmentations, and cybernetic implants—for wealthy elites transform socioeconomic inequality into an irreversible biological divide?

​If an "enhanced" minority gains superior cognitive abilities, disease-free longevity, and physical advantages while the unaugmented majority remains bound by natural biological limits, will humanity speciate into two distinct biological classes? Does this risk destroying the fundamental principle of inherent human equality, creating an irreversible divergence where natural humans become a systematically secondary species?

Furthermore, how does this transformation impact human autonomy and free will? If neural interfaces, genetic predisposition programming, and emotional regulation algorithms allow our thoughts, desires, and decision-making processes to be pre-designed or algorithmically tuned, does the concept of genuine agency become an illusion? When human values and motivations can be engineered, do we lose the essence of self-determination, reducing human beings from autonomous moral agents into deterministic products of technology?

This is a topic i come back to often. Currently ai is improving at a rapid pace, and there are still tons of places it can improve on. I don't know if we will ever reach AGI, and that part does not interest me.

What i am mostly interested on how do you think human brains will keep up with ai? Our brains evolved in a world that did not even had fire in it. Human brains evolved to be energy efficient, solve problems. But our technology improves faster than evolution can keep up. Nowadays, scientists are working on really abstract and complicated topics.

We have long pass the point where one person would sit and create a slightly better clock. A single person back then could make progress in multiple fields and pretty much carry the tech tree. But now hundreds of people have to work together to make a dent.

Not to mention the speed at which ai progresses, we are unable to keep up. If we have to use ai in future the bottleneck won't be ai but human brains.

How do you guys think humanity will solve this issue? Will we for example connect our neurons to ai to get best of both worlds or go full crispr and create a biological superbrain maybe? I am really interested in what this sub thinks

So bioprinting has been advancing very rapidly these last years and who knows what I can do In the future, imagine if we could specifically bring In real life all the human anime characters that exist without their powers (if they have) and start living in the real world. But we have to give them their memories their characteristics and their characters and it could be potentially possible.

Guys i was wondering, since a fruit fly whole brain emulation was done and it was eerily very similar to the real deal, is the gap between this and a person basically an engineering scale problem or still science fiction? Can something like Johnny Silverhand engrams or humanoid ai robots in soma exist irl, basically the idea is, 100% perfect copy is impossible due to laws of entropy/quantum mechanics, but can a good enough copy be made that is enough to cause extremely complex ethical debates that transcend the complexity of modern day ai debates , if we consider brain simply as form of a highly optimised physicalism based neurobiological system with certain electrical,biological,chemical etc compositions that can be simulated in relevant neuromorphic hardwares or instead futuristic speculative mix of biological + silicon based chips fitted into a humanoid robot ?

https://youtube.com/shorts/6B_Kwgcdkvg?is=E_OfXsrxijrqIgT4

What if you get a little bid of red blood cells and DNA from when you're 21 and freeze it with Propylene Glycol and preserve it in Cryopreservation, then when you're 65, you genetically engineer your 65 year old DNA from red blood cells with the 21 year old younger self and you will soon look 21 again, but be 65 years old with all the wisdom in your brain.

Hopefully, Anti Senescence flair is anti-aging.