Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

WeeDingwall t1_j1o19nk wrote

This is what would probably replace AI. Enhanced humans.

14

[deleted] t1_j1o7h7m wrote

[removed]

7

please_remain_clam t1_j1odtb9 wrote

That is an excellent point. Imagine seeing every angle and to be able to weigh outcomes. Whoa

4

Gubekochi t1_j1oglw5 wrote

What is commonly know as "wisdom" in the common parlance. But available to all.

3

please_remain_clam t1_j1okv5t wrote

I disagree. Wisdom comes only from learning from past mistakes and proactively avoiding similar situations. I’m talking about real-time global threat assessment and analysis. Unless you have another take on it?

0

Frequent_Example_167 t1_j1on0km wrote

Wisdom is the ability to make good decisions with knowledge possessed. Having made mistakes isn’t a prerequisite to being wise. Technology like this would increase peoples knowledge pool quickly, and if a person is “wise” they would make less mistakes as a result. Wisdom: the soundness of an action or decision with regard to the application of experience, knowledge, and good judgment.

3

please_remain_clam t1_j1ooj2c wrote

I follow what you mean, but it seems a term that both of our understandings are at odds over is magnitude of effect. I see it as an enhancement but not all consuming and you appear to see it as global connectivity.

1

Gubekochi t1_j1omr12 wrote

While I very much agree that experience (including that of past mistakes, yours or otherwise) is a component of wisdom, I would say that knowledge and good judgment are also components. Otherwise, if it were purely experience/mistakes based, wisdom would offer no benefit when facing new situations... which, maybe under your conception of wisdom, a highly intangible concept, is entirely possible to be honest.

In that regard, someone's wisdom is like... how adequate a guidance does the sum of their general rule of thumb and mental shortcuts is to take decisions that don't suck.

Lots of things can have contributed to that pool of general principles a given individual has.

2

L0ckeandDemosthenes t1_j1oh6g6 wrote

I wrote a paper on this in college and was interviewed for grants. I told them I had changed my mind because I believed this technology would later be used in the military and then on society. Eventually it would be used to control society. They recorded me throughout the whole process and their faces went from intrigued to terrified by the end where I turned down the grant and walked out.

I am still positive to this day that this technology will take part in ruining humanity and ending free will as we know it.

First they will sell you on upgrades with computer interfaces for your children to skip college and learn at beyond human capabilities. This will quickly divide classes from the rich to the poor. Only good jobs will be possessed by the applicants with a neuro link. Imagine uploading eight years of college into your brain and then going into field training for actual experience. Next imagine soldiers with maps uploaded to their brain with enemy territories and multiple plan A B and C programmed into their brains. We are talking matrix level technology. From here you just need to put time into the actual training with any field, be it a doctor, lawyer, engineer, marine...

When I came up with the idea of spoofing memories, I soon realized that this would inevitably be used to falsify memories in witnesses minds to put people in jail, it would be used to falsify history to control public perception of the reality they live in. The world and humanity would lose free will forever.

So I walked out and forgot about the idea, knowing full well, if I didn't do it, someone else would. Atleast I wouldn't be the one responsible for the dystopia hell the future would inevitably become. First time I've thought about that day since. Fuck.

This was back in 2016-17 for the record.

7

throwdroptwo t1_j1okqen wrote

SO U COULD HAVE BEEN THEY SO THEY SHOULD MAKE IT SO THAT AND U TURNED IT DOWN ????

HELLO ???

0

Futurology-ModTeam t1_j1oz8j4 wrote

Rule 13 - Content older than 6 months must have [month, year] in the title.

1