4 ms·

Zoltan Istvan, presidential candidate of the Transhumanist Party

33 points by fezz 11y ago

stoolpigeon 11y ago
His name had me very, very confused. Wikipedia says his full name is Zoltan Istvan Gyurko. That makes a lot more sense. I don't think there's an English common name that is the equivalent of Zoltán (It comes from the word sultan), István is Steven. So if we just pick another common English name, calling him Zoltan Istvan is a lot like someone having the name Robert Steven. Gyurkó on the other hand is a normal Hungarian family name.
- underyx 11y ago
  Actually, family names that can also be first names are quite common in Hungarian. There are even people who have the same first and family name, such as István István. Edit: Heh, case in point: https://hu.wikipedia.org/wiki/Istv%C3%A1n_Istv%C3%A1n https://hu.wikipedia.org/wiki/Istv%C3%A1n_Istv%C3%A1n
  - stoolpigeon 11y ago
    Huh - in the 4 years I've lived in Hungary I've yet to come across this. Of course that isn't that long - but enough that seeing Zoltan Istvan messed me up. Thanks for pointing that out - it's interesting.
    - Create 11y ago
      It's only from Napoleon, that there are names you are familiar with: and only in territories he occupied (much like SI, house numbering etc.). The places he didn't invade would keep names like "Bush House, London", or names like "Richardson" ...son of Richard. Zoltan Istvan is for Zoltan's son Istvan and he presumably would be from somewhere like Transylvania, where Napoleon (~ administration) never got a foothold.
  - mcv 11y ago
    It's also common in the US. Surnames like Harrison or Taylor are surprisingly often used as firstnames.
- coldtea 11y ago
  >calling him Zoltan Istvan is a lot like someone having the name Robert Steven Actually there are lots of persons with names like "Robert Steven" and similar ("first names" as surnames).
- teh_klev 11y ago
  My first name and surname are both what you would consider first names, it's not that unusual, or maybe it's a Scottish thing. It does make for some really annoying conversations, both analogue and electronic where people call me by my surname e.g "Hi Kenny", and then I know they're not actually paying attention.
reasonattlm 11y ago
Zoltan Istvan is a character, and an outspoken transhumanist in a time when it is becoming perhaps a trifle unfashionable to refer to oneself as a transhumanist. Of course we are all transhumanists together here, reading this post while hoping and planning for a future in which fundamental limits of the human condition will be overcome through technological progress. Istvan has been publishing and speaking relentlessly on the topic of transhumanism for years now, and of late has settled upon the forthcoming presidential race as one of the few opportunities for an activist to make use of the US political system to promote a cause. In Europe starting single issue parties is a viable approach, but not in the US. So Istvan is touring, attracting attention, and giving interviews. Here is something to consider: in the matter of changing the world, is it better to fund research into the technological progress you desire or is it better to fund publicity efforts for that same technological progress? I suspect that both are needed, striking some sort of balance between (a) science that is within striking distance but effectively invisible to the world and large funding sources, which has been the state for SENS rejuvenation research for quite some time, and (b) advocacy that is so far ahead of technological plausibility that the snake-oil salesmen sneak in and corrupt an entire generation with their nonsense, which is the story of the last quarter of the last century with respect to progress towards the treatment of aging. An argument for the "fund research" side is that meaningful progress in science tends to generate its own news. An argument for the "more publicity efforts" side is that there are plenty of historical examples of important scientific progress languishing at the verge of completion for a lifetime or longer. Personally, I'm in favor of funding the research at this time, and one of my main reasons for that is that early stage research has become very cheap over the course of the modern biotechnology revolution, while publicity remains stubbornly expensive. Yes, it is far easier to send your message out into the world, but there is now such a sea of content that making yourself heard is harder than ever.
- eli_gottlieb 11y ago
  Objectivism is a pathetically small-minded ideology.
- aaronem 11y ago
  > we are all transhumanists together here You assume rather a lot, don't you?
alphadevx 11y ago
I listened to an interview with him recently on the Singularity podcast, discussing this campaign among other topics, quite interesting: https://www.singularityweblog.com/transhumanist-zoltan-istvan-on-his-presidential-campaign/ https://www.singularityweblog.com/transhumanist-zoltan-istva...
ommunist 11y ago
This is the only sane guy among all the candidates.

33 points by fezz 11y ago

His name had me very, very confused. Wikipedia says his full name is Zoltan Istvan Gyurko. That makes a lot more sense. I don't think there's an English common name that is the equivalent of Zoltán (It comes from the word sultan), István is Steven. So if we just pick another common English name, calling him Zoltan Istvan is a lot like someone having the name Robert Steven. Gyurkó on the other hand is a normal Hungarian family name.

underyx 11y ago
Actually, family names that can also be first names are quite common in Hungarian. There are even people who have the same first and family name, such as István István. Edit: Heh, case in point: https://hu.wikipedia.org/wiki/Istv%C3%A1n_Istv%C3%A1n https://hu.wikipedia.org/wiki/Istv%C3%A1n_Istv%C3%A1n
- stoolpigeon 11y ago
  Huh - in the 4 years I've lived in Hungary I've yet to come across this. Of course that isn't that long - but enough that seeing Zoltan Istvan messed me up. Thanks for pointing that out - it's interesting.
  - Create 11y ago
    It's only from Napoleon, that there are names you are familiar with: and only in territories he occupied (much like SI, house numbering etc.). The places he didn't invade would keep names like "Bush House, London", or names like "Richardson" ...son of Richard. Zoltan Istvan is for Zoltan's son Istvan and he presumably would be from somewhere like Transylvania, where Napoleon (~ administration) never got a foothold.
- mcv 11y ago
  It's also common in the US. Surnames like Harrison or Taylor are surprisingly often used as firstnames.
coldtea 11y ago
>calling him Zoltan Istvan is a lot like someone having the name Robert Steven Actually there are lots of persons with names like "Robert Steven" and similar ("first names" as surnames).
teh_klev 11y ago
My first name and surname are both what you would consider first names, it's not that unusual, or maybe it's a Scottish thing. It does make for some really annoying conversations, both analogue and electronic where people call me by my surname e.g "Hi Kenny", and then I know they're not actually paying attention.

reasonattlm 11y ago

Zoltan Istvan is a character, and an outspoken transhumanist in a time when it is becoming perhaps a trifle unfashionable to refer to oneself as a transhumanist. Of course we are all transhumanists together here, reading this post while hoping and planning for a future in which fundamental limits of the human condition will be overcome through technological progress. Istvan has been publishing and speaking relentlessly on the topic of transhumanism for years now, and of late has settled upon the forthcoming presidential race as one of the few opportunities for an activist to make use of the US political system to promote a cause. In Europe starting single issue parties is a viable approach, but not in the US. So Istvan is touring, attracting attention, and giving interviews. Here is something to consider: in the matter of changing the world, is it better to fund research into the technological progress you desire or is it better to fund publicity efforts for that same technological progress? I suspect that both are needed, striking some sort of balance between (a) science that is within striking distance but effectively invisible to the world and large funding sources, which has been the state for SENS rejuvenation research for quite some time, and (b) advocacy that is so far ahead of technological plausibility that the snake-oil salesmen sneak in and corrupt an entire generation with their nonsense, which is the story of the last quarter of the last century with respect to progress towards the treatment of aging. An argument for the "fund research" side is that meaningful progress in science tends to generate its own news. An argument for the "more publicity efforts" side is that there are plenty of historical examples of important scientific progress languishing at the verge of completion for a lifetime or longer. Personally, I'm in favor of funding the research at this time, and one of my main reasons for that is that early stage research has become very cheap over the course of the modern biotechnology revolution, while publicity remains stubbornly expensive. Yes, it is far easier to send your message out into the world, but there is now such a sea of content that making yourself heard is harder than ever.

eli_gottlieb 11y ago
Objectivism is a pathetically small-minded ideology.
aaronem 11y ago
> we are all transhumanists together here You assume rather a lot, don't you?

alphadevx 11y ago

I listened to an interview with him recently on the Singularity podcast, discussing this campaign among other topics, quite interesting: https://www.singularityweblog.com/transhumanist-zoltan-istvan-on-his-presidential-campaign/ https://www.singularityweblog.com/transhumanist-zoltan-istva...

ommunist 11y ago

This is the only sane guy among all the candidates.