420chan now has a web-based IRC client available, right here
Leave these fields empty (spam trap):
Name
You can leave this blank to post anonymously, or you can create a Tripcode by using the float Name#Password
Comment
[*]Italic Text[/*]
[**]Bold Text[/**]
[~]Taimapedia Article[/~]
[%]Spoiler Text[/%]
>Highlight/Quote Text
[pre]Preformatted & Monospace text[/pre]
1. Numbered lists become ordered lists
* Bulleted lists become unordered lists
File

Sandwich


Community Updates

420chan now supports HTTPS! If you find any issues, you may report them in this thread
One of these days. by Walter Dunkinlock - Fri, 05 Jan 2018 03:23:30 EST ID:vWDrIt6H No.37385 Ignore Report Quick Reply
File: 1515140610356.jpg -(31499B / 30.76KB, 757x310) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 31499
Do you guys think they'll roll out the death robots used to fight future wars gradually or all at once?
>>
Eugene Pittdock - Sat, 06 Jan 2018 18:35:04 EST ID:76K+Q/+J No.37386 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Like, ¿in addition to the death robots that have been fighting in wars for the last 20 years?
>>
Simon Claydale - Sun, 07 Jan 2018 05:51:19 EST ID:0qZWd2x8 No.37387 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>37386
Yeah they are gradually rolling them out. More of them as they become more useful in a broader range of applications and cheaper and more effective in the things they already do.
>>
Wesley Cocklenore - Mon, 08 Jan 2018 15:15:30 EST ID:fIS7VhYA No.37388 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>37387
Yeah but, there are efforts around the world to ban autonomous weapons already taking place. As a futurist and a novelist (not the writer-type) I see the potential for autonomous weapons as a future clade of engineered peoples, but still think we probably couldn't handle that shit nowadays with our current global psyche. So, I guess I am for banning them for now, until we can get our shit together. Once we can can fix death by digital consciousness transfer into new bodies I think autonomous weapons will be fair game, then the real fun can begin.
>>
Graham Dannermatch - Wed, 10 Jan 2018 13:11:11 EST ID:vvnF1i/0 No.37389 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>37388
If we 'have our shit together' what need do we have for weapons? I think any scenario where a large part of our planetary productive capacity goes to making better machines to destroy other parts of our planetary productive capacity simply because we are trapped in meat-ware tribalistic thinking patterns would constitute a people whose 'shit is fucked right up' rather than 'together.'

Say no to violence, whether you're thinking with carbon or silicon. Otherwise, what was the point of becoming silicon in the first place?
>>
Reuben Wammerman - Thu, 11 Jan 2018 12:44:00 EST ID:fIS7VhYA No.37390 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1515692640857.jpg -(262308B / 256.16KB, 900x1200) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
>>37389
I think you are underestimating the cultural and memetic benefits of digital resurrection and "resleeving" into a new body, biont, cybernetic or otherwise, and how much fun and adventure could come from IRL fps arena games, as well as what the elimination of permanent death basically means for every industry and nigh, activity, in the transhuman's arsenal.

Violence that isn't fueled by hate is just sport, which is really where you want violence to be played out.
>>
Simon Gapperwed - Sat, 13 Jan 2018 03:05:49 EST ID:UQqXUXz3 No.37392 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>37390
This is all well and good, but their's not really a place for autonomous weapons in sport either. If you're not playing against other humans you should probably just do it in VR.
>>
Ernest Dartshit - Sun, 14 Jan 2018 22:50:26 EST ID:mosf3Pgf No.37393 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>37392
But, autonomous weapons are people too. I would love to have a gladiator battle to the non-permanent death vs. a walking rocket launcher.
>>
Polly Pockstone - Tue, 16 Jan 2018 14:46:00 EST ID:eA9THK/8 No.37394 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>37392
Or with disposable remote drones. Probably the safest way to avoid losing your consciousness in a freak accident.
>>
Jarvis Clayworth - Thu, 18 Jan 2018 15:28:48 EST ID:1mSkByiZ No.37395 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>37390
I get that when you aren't actually extinguishing life the moral equation around violence changes. But you still haven't made a good argument for why we should waste energy to make things just to waste energy destroying them. It's inefficient, and in evolution, inefficiency is death.
>>
Jarvis Clayworth - Thu, 18 Jan 2018 15:33:17 EST ID:1mSkByiZ No.37396 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>37395
To clarify my position a bit more, I don't deny that this kind of thing will happen and may even captivate post-singularity civilization for a time. But the 'cultural and memetic benefits' almost are exclusively reinforcements of our primitive biological instincts, and thus over time I think any post-singularity civilization will put aside such extravagances as childish occupations, or at least confine them to less-messy VR for those who simply refuse to give up meat-ware programming. nb
>>
Priscilla Pittingson - Thu, 18 Jan 2018 20:25:41 EST ID:mosf3Pgf No.37397 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1516325141036.png -(2306628B / 2.20MB, 1441x1080) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
>>37396
I think over grand enough timescales yes, but in a, say, sull galactic scale post human society there will always still be people born in the lowest drudges of society. Utopia cannot be omnipresent, it's nigh impossible. SO while an Asimovian Supraconsciousness collective galactic mind made out of the comptutronium'd matter and nigh space-time of the universe ma be an end-goal, it won't be everyone. Life goes on. Who knows, maybe we are an unaware planet in a galactic game like this, and when we die we are just matter-computroium reincarnated on another planet by the Greater Hive-mind of a premordial civilization.
>>
John Hadgewater - Fri, 19 Jan 2018 00:59:11 EST ID:1mSkByiZ No.37398 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>37397
Well, I disagree with the idea that social inequality would be a necessary component of post-scarcity civilization at any level of space colonization. Social inequality didn't exist before the advent of the concept of scarcity, and I think they go hand in hand with each other, since the only thing that could distinguish social orders would be imbalance of access to meaningful goods, which post-scarcity economics obliterates. So once that's gone, I don't think you'll be able to maintain a stratified social order (ergo, no drudges.) I think this is something that species come up against within the event horizon of their singularities, since the idea of the singularity is inherently connected to the problem of scarcity, rather than being an aspect civilizations surmount in some far future stage of development. Of course, all this is speculative.

I do definitely agree with the notion that our existence is most likely just another layer within an infinitely regressed simulation though.


Report Post
Reason
Note
Please be descriptive with report notes,
this helps staff resolve issues quicker.