3 ms·

Crossing a road might become way safer in the future with self driving cars, or at least safety systems like automated break assistants becoming more commonplac

by est31 5y ago

Crossing a road might become way safer in the future with self driving cars, or at least safety systems like automated break assistants becoming more commonplace. As for construction sites, robotics might replace many jobs in construction in the future. As for the far future, maybe we will lie in a tank somewhere, have a cord attached to our brain and control robots that are in the dangerous environments for us. At least the people who can afford such a life style. It would also mean that we don't have to do shorter trips to visit someone or some place as you could just use avatars that are already present. Only for larger distances will ping delays become significant (thousands of km). It also means that we don't need breathable atmospheres or livable temperatures any more. Terraforming Mars would be a waste of time, as would be living down a gravity well. Maybe even the robots would be a waste if we can just live in simulated worlds instead. Already now there is a large gamer population. If you extrapolate the growing segment, we might end in a world where people spend their entire lives in simulated environments.

slver 5y ago
This kind of thinking makes a nice sci-fi flick but not a good predictor of reality. Just the pandemic should've given you a hint that people at large don't like being confined to their homes and living in a virtual world. You'd have to override millions of years of evolution to do that, and I'd argue a society like this would collapse due to its general non-viability, even before our psychological health ruins us. Also no matter if you live in a virtual system or a real one, your body needs are real, and tied to an ecosystem. Taking a brain and putting in a jar works in Robocop, but again, not in reality. It's not a matter of technology. everything is interconnected. Anyway.
- KronisLV 5y ago
  I'm not entirely sure about thinking in absolutes. > Just the pandemic should've given you a hint that people at large don't like being confined to their homes and living in a virtual world. This might be true for the majority of the society, but not everyone. Personally, i enjoy isolation from others for the most part due to my personality being rather introverted. This is also why i'm okay with remote work and prefer it to being in the office. There are certainly other people who wouldn't mind doing their jobs remotely and even if not everyone needs to do that, the technologies that would be developed around this concept would most certainly be useful in some way, like remote surgery: https://fortune.com/2020/02/11/tele-robotics-surgery-5g-health/ https://fortune.com/2020/02/11/tele-robotics-surgery-5g-heal... Even if the things above are somewhat feasonable (with technologies like VRChat becoming an interesting way of socializing for some, as well as communities on Discord and Reddit, as well as social media in general), as for the "brain jar" scenario, i think you are mostly correct. I doubt that we'd be able to tackle the more "sci-fi" topics that concern our biology. For example, even if one could maintain a brain within some sort of a container, we know way too little about what exactly it'd need to remain healthy, as well as how we'd connect all of the nerve endings. Essentially, i think that we need to study our bodies more, since there's probably a link even between our gut bacteria and the functioning of our brains, as well as all of the hormones etc.: https://www.daimanuel.com/2020/11/17/how-your-gut-health-affects-your-brain/ https://www.daimanuel.com/2020/11/17/how-your-gut-health-aff... That's not to say that we shouldn't explore new possibilities and research longetivity or even the mechanisms that control the functioning of our bodies, though. That sort of research would at the very least decrease the health spending in the elderly and would help them enjoy their later years more fully. I think it's worth pursuing without going into either of the two extremes - full trans humanism or total denial.
  - slver 5y ago
    What's true about the majority of society... shapes society. I also think it's ridiculous spectator sports exist, and right next to so-called next we get sports news. Is anyone asking me? No. I'm in the minority. Sorry to be direct, but for most people who enjoy VR environments, but not actual environment, the issue is often in self-perception, confidence and so on. The VR is an artificial SUBSTITUTE for social engagement. But it's to actual engagement like porn is to having an actual relationship (i.e. not good at all). There's place for VR and so on, but it'll never become the dominant form of existence, unless we hook our brains to the network at a very very low level the kind which is not on the horizon yet (and no, Neuralink isn't it).
    - KronisLV 5y ago
      I definitely agree, that these things can't replace those experiences in their full fidelity and therefore are to be considered substitutes. Yet the technology existing in of itself and these methods of communication and self expression existing expand the options that are available to people, which can be useful! Would the ICT industry be able to adapt to the challenges posed by the current pandemic and remote working conditions, if progress hadn't been made in regards to asynchronous communication methods previously (Slack, Teams, Mattermost, Rocket.Chat, Zulip etc.)? Probably, but the end result could be less enjoyable than it is now. That's not to say that anyone should be forced to replace their preferred means of communication in the long term (except for maybe temporarily in the face of situations like the current one in the world), or be forced to live to 150 years of age, or even be a brain in a jar if we're discussing sci-fi. Yet, in my mind, having a bit of diversity in our approaches to seeing what's possible is definitely a good thing! So, let people enjoy spectator sports, let them enjoy their sports news and enjoy all of the interesting things that result from the industry needing to achieve everything to support them, from high framerate cameras for slow motion replay, streaming games to large audiences in real time, technologies for cameras that track balls going across the field quickly, motion stabilization and any of the other thousands of neat things you wouldn't think about twice, but could find use in other industries. To sum up: > You'd have to override millions of years of evolution to do that, and I'd argue a society like this would collapse due to its general non-viability, even before our psychological health ruins us. I think you're right here that all of society will not change, but that's not to say that it hurts to be optimistic about new possibilities.
- p2detar 5y ago
  > This kind of thinking makes a nice sci-fi flick but not a good predictor of reality. Just the pandemic should've given you a hint that people at large don't like being confined to their homes and living in a virtual world. So you claim to know what future generations will be like? Not a good idea. OP is quite right that many kids today spend a great deal of time in front of screens. This is even more noticeable in Asia, the most populated continent on Earth, where online gaming is huge. I would not be so fast to waive this as a sci-fi flick. It's the classic misalignment of generation's values mistake. We should not assume that we'll be able to understand what our children and grandchildren's values will be.

by est31 5y ago

slver 5y ago

This kind of thinking makes a nice sci-fi flick but not a good predictor of reality. Just the pandemic should've given you a hint that people at large don't like being confined to their homes and living in a virtual world. You'd have to override millions of years of evolution to do that, and I'd argue a society like this would collapse due to its general non-viability, even before our psychological health ruins us. Also no matter if you live in a virtual system or a real one, your body needs are real, and tied to an ecosystem. Taking a brain and putting in a jar works in Robocop, but again, not in reality. It's not a matter of technology. everything is interconnected. Anyway.

KronisLV 5y ago
I'm not entirely sure about thinking in absolutes. > Just the pandemic should've given you a hint that people at large don't like being confined to their homes and living in a virtual world. This might be true for the majority of the society, but not everyone. Personally, i enjoy isolation from others for the most part due to my personality being rather introverted. This is also why i'm okay with remote work and prefer it to being in the office. There are certainly other people who wouldn't mind doing their jobs remotely and even if not everyone needs to do that, the technologies that would be developed around this concept would most certainly be useful in some way, like remote surgery: https://fortune.com/2020/02/11/tele-robotics-surgery-5g-health/ https://fortune.com/2020/02/11/tele-robotics-surgery-5g-heal... Even if the things above are somewhat feasonable (with technologies like VRChat becoming an interesting way of socializing for some, as well as communities on Discord and Reddit, as well as social media in general), as for the "brain jar" scenario, i think you are mostly correct. I doubt that we'd be able to tackle the more "sci-fi" topics that concern our biology. For example, even if one could maintain a brain within some sort of a container, we know way too little about what exactly it'd need to remain healthy, as well as how we'd connect all of the nerve endings. Essentially, i think that we need to study our bodies more, since there's probably a link even between our gut bacteria and the functioning of our brains, as well as all of the hormones etc.: https://www.daimanuel.com/2020/11/17/how-your-gut-health-affects-your-brain/ https://www.daimanuel.com/2020/11/17/how-your-gut-health-aff... That's not to say that we shouldn't explore new possibilities and research longetivity or even the mechanisms that control the functioning of our bodies, though. That sort of research would at the very least decrease the health spending in the elderly and would help them enjoy their later years more fully. I think it's worth pursuing without going into either of the two extremes - full trans humanism or total denial.
- slver 5y ago
  What's true about the majority of society... shapes society. I also think it's ridiculous spectator sports exist, and right next to so-called next we get sports news. Is anyone asking me? No. I'm in the minority. Sorry to be direct, but for most people who enjoy VR environments, but not actual environment, the issue is often in self-perception, confidence and so on. The VR is an artificial SUBSTITUTE for social engagement. But it's to actual engagement like porn is to having an actual relationship (i.e. not good at all). There's place for VR and so on, but it'll never become the dominant form of existence, unless we hook our brains to the network at a very very low level the kind which is not on the horizon yet (and no, Neuralink isn't it).
  - KronisLV 5y ago
    I definitely agree, that these things can't replace those experiences in their full fidelity and therefore are to be considered substitutes. Yet the technology existing in of itself and these methods of communication and self expression existing expand the options that are available to people, which can be useful! Would the ICT industry be able to adapt to the challenges posed by the current pandemic and remote working conditions, if progress hadn't been made in regards to asynchronous communication methods previously (Slack, Teams, Mattermost, Rocket.Chat, Zulip etc.)? Probably, but the end result could be less enjoyable than it is now. That's not to say that anyone should be forced to replace their preferred means of communication in the long term (except for maybe temporarily in the face of situations like the current one in the world), or be forced to live to 150 years of age, or even be a brain in a jar if we're discussing sci-fi. Yet, in my mind, having a bit of diversity in our approaches to seeing what's possible is definitely a good thing! So, let people enjoy spectator sports, let them enjoy their sports news and enjoy all of the interesting things that result from the industry needing to achieve everything to support them, from high framerate cameras for slow motion replay, streaming games to large audiences in real time, technologies for cameras that track balls going across the field quickly, motion stabilization and any of the other thousands of neat things you wouldn't think about twice, but could find use in other industries. To sum up: > You'd have to override millions of years of evolution to do that, and I'd argue a society like this would collapse due to its general non-viability, even before our psychological health ruins us. I think you're right here that all of society will not change, but that's not to say that it hurts to be optimistic about new possibilities.
p2detar 5y ago
> This kind of thinking makes a nice sci-fi flick but not a good predictor of reality. Just the pandemic should've given you a hint that people at large don't like being confined to their homes and living in a virtual world. So you claim to know what future generations will be like? Not a good idea. OP is quite right that many kids today spend a great deal of time in front of screens. This is even more noticeable in Asia, the most populated continent on Earth, where online gaming is huge. I would not be so fast to waive this as a sci-fi flick. It's the classic misalignment of generation's values mistake. We should not assume that we'll be able to understand what our children and grandchildren's values will be.