3 ms·

If humans evolved into in silico entities, then human bodies would not need eventually to be in space, would they?

michaelneale 18y ago
Yes unless there is some reason why that can't work (ie AI is impossible, or similar) then flinging meat around space doesn't make any sense.
- xiaoma 18y ago
  "Flinging meat around space" is a nice phrase I'll have to remember.
deleted 18y ago
[deleted]
bd 18y ago
Speed of light. If you would want to experience another world, you wouldn't want to have your sensors/effectors too far away from your brain. And it doesn't matter if you would be flesh or silicon. Even planets in our solar system are already too far for remote interaction.
- gravitycop 18y ago
  it doesn't matter if you would be flesh or silicon. It does matter. It is cheaper to send 100 lbs of computer+powersupply, than to send 10,000 lbs of human+lifesupport. - you wouldn't want to have your sensors far away from your effectors. If you existed in silico, why would your sensors need to be far away from your effectors?
  - bd 18y ago
    I meant - "you would want to experience" - as in you personally (you = one human being). Edit: Sorry, I corrected my older comment, it was supposed to say "sensors and effectors far away from brain". You cannot effectively "be present" [1] at the remote world if your perceive-think-act loop would be spread over large distance. So even if you would be in silico, you would still need to transfer your actual hardware, not just dumb robots. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presence_%28telepresence%29 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presence_%28telepresence%29
    - gravitycop 18y ago
      What I meant by in silico was existence in computer hardware. Sending 100 lbs of computer+powersupply there means being there, without being spread telepresently over large distances.
    - gravitycop 18y ago
      (you = one human being) If, as I originally posited, humans were to evolve into in silico entities, then human beings (= naked apes) would not exist, would they (other than, perhaps, as specimens on display in zoos)?

Yes unless there is some reason why that can't work (ie AI is impossible, or similar) then flinging meat around space doesn't make any sense.

xiaoma 18y ago
"Flinging meat around space" is a nice phrase I'll have to remember.

deleted 18y ago

[deleted]

bd 18y ago

Speed of light. If you would want to experience another world, you wouldn't want to have your sensors/effectors too far away from your brain. And it doesn't matter if you would be flesh or silicon. Even planets in our solar system are already too far for remote interaction.

gravitycop 18y ago
it doesn't matter if you would be flesh or silicon. It does matter. It is cheaper to send 100 lbs of computer+powersupply, than to send 10,000 lbs of human+lifesupport. - you wouldn't want to have your sensors far away from your effectors. If you existed in silico, why would your sensors need to be far away from your effectors?
- bd 18y ago
  I meant - "you would want to experience" - as in you personally (you = one human being). Edit: Sorry, I corrected my older comment, it was supposed to say "sensors and effectors far away from brain". You cannot effectively "be present" [1] at the remote world if your perceive-think-act loop would be spread over large distance. So even if you would be in silico, you would still need to transfer your actual hardware, not just dumb robots. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presence_%28telepresence%29 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presence_%28telepresence%29
  - gravitycop 18y ago
    What I meant by in silico was existence in computer hardware. Sending 100 lbs of computer+powersupply there means being there, without being spread telepresently over large distances.
  - gravitycop 18y ago
    (you = one human being) If, as I originally posited, humans were to evolve into in silico entities, then human beings (= naked apes) would not exist, would they (other than, perhaps, as specimens on display in zoos)?