# Human Augmentation - Your thoughts?



## Igneous01 (Jan 27, 2011)

For those that are unaware: Human Augmentation is the enhancement, or betterment of Human body parts, by means of technology and other forms of engineering. Research institutions are trying to overcome human limitations in the body by creating their own, more superior body parts.

Here is a short documentary about the subject:





There are some incredible advancements in this research that I wasn't aware of. The 'Eyeborg' being the primary example.

But now as this form of technology expands and becomes more sophisticated, some questions need to be asked.

Morality and Ethics in Augmentation?

Loss of individualism and uniqueness?

Consequences of mutations involving augmentation?

Mind control, the ability to hack into another persons body?

Ok, so alot of this is still far away (especially the body hacking part), but whats to come when the ability to merge computer processing, and software with the brain? What makes one sure you will be in complete control of yourself?

Im not against Augmentation, but I do not like the idea of loosing the uniqueness of myself, and having the same ability as everyone else, only waiting for an upgrade next week so I can play Scriabin 4 times faster? Wheres the human in that?

Your thoughts?


----------



## Aramis (Mar 1, 2009)

Wouldn't like to hug piece of metal.


----------



## Weston (Jul 11, 2008)

I can't watch the documentary at work (though I am on break) but I know this is inevitable, and mostly desireable. How I would love to hear the upper frequencies again or be able to see into infrared or ultraviolet. I want to be able to think at a machine and have it create the sounds in my head or the visions. None of this is far fetched at all. It's already here or will be within our lifetimes. I am so ready for it. 

However some things need no improvements. I hope we don't see ladies walking around all looking like some pop diva with "enhanced" body parts. That would be a damn shame.


----------



## Igneous01 (Jan 27, 2011)

I can agree with some of your sentiments Weston, the ability to design and create right in your head than on paper or software is incredibly useful for anyone I would imagine. My only concern is the consequences we have not thought of regarding augmentation (ie, every pianist having the same hand performance, Or a Chopin knowledge kit, where everyone has the knowledge of how to play like Chopin, making the need for having so many musicians obsolete). So long as the ability to be creative, unique and expand upon your enhancements is available, then there is desire in augmentation.


----------



## Polednice (Sep 13, 2009)

The "ability to be creative" and "unique" is far more dependent on personal interpretation and cognitive processes than it is on physical capabilities. Obviously, a thousand people might have hands that give them the ability to play Brahms 'correctly', but that does not mean any one of them will play it as movingly as in the recordings we love.

In purely medical terms, I think the technology is wonderful. However, in consumer terms (an eventuality much after medical viability, of course), I think there will be a sizeable backlash for the reasons you outlined - individuality - but I think it's more widespread and popular for people to want to do anything and everything as soon as possible, and individuality will sadly lose out to that.


----------



## Igneous01 (Jan 27, 2011)

@Polednice 
so far, yes they look mostly like physical upgrades right now, but who knows what neural research will find and discover years from now? 

I just dont want to see "Jock personality v2.0" available for download or something ridiculous like that.


----------



## Polednice (Sep 13, 2009)

Igneous01 said:


> @Polednice
> so far, yes they look mostly like physical upgrades right now, but who knows what neural research will find and discover years from now?
> 
> I just dont want to see "Jock personality v2.0" available for download or something ridiculous like that.


I think humans are too obsessed with how they see themselves and what their own abilities are, rather than the role that they play in a larger community of human achievement. Unless that perspective is changed, Jock 2.0 it will be!


----------



## Ukko (Jun 4, 2010)

This 'augmentation' has been of military interest for decades. The 'standard' foot soldier is now too slow and too vulnerable to 'pay back' the expense of training him for modern warfare. This augmentation _will_ happen.

The question of what to do with the guy after his tour is done...


----------



## Manxfeeder (Oct 19, 2010)

Of course, anyone wearing eyeglasses or hearing aids has benefitted from some form of augmentation; now we don't have to wait millions of years for our defects to evolve away. But it goes without saying, people will always abuse it, and there were be those who choose not to use it. It reminds me of the movie Gattaca.


----------



## Amfibius (Jul 19, 2006)

I am a doctor. I have seen many patients with disabilities. For most of them, having a disability is the difference between living independently and living in care, and sometimes having your dignity violated on a daily basis. Some of them can not toilet or dress by themselves - ask yourself how you would feel if a stranger or family member (not your spouse) had to wipe you clean every time you go to the toilet, or handle your genitals so that you could urinate, or saw you naked every day when helping you to get dressed. 

I think it can only be a good thing.


----------



## Igneous01 (Jan 27, 2011)

Amfibius said:


> I am a doctor. I have seen many patients with disabilities. For most of them, having a disability is the difference between living independently and living in care, and sometimes having your dignity violated on a daily basis. Some of them can not toilet or dress by themselves - ask yourself how you would feel if a stranger or family member (not your spouse) had to wipe you clean every time you go to the toilet, or handle your genitals so that you could urinate, or saw you naked every day when helping you to get dressed.
> 
> I think it can only be a good thing.


My issue is not so much with people who may be disabled or have impairments in there living - by all means I consider a good thing that they have a second chance with prosthetic limbs and can live out there lives like many others.

My issue is with after that, when say people will decide to sacrifice their bodies to get better ones so to speak, even when perfectly healthy.


----------



## Ukko (Jun 4, 2010)

Manxfeeder said:


> Of course, anyone wearing eyeglasses or hearing aids has benefitted from some form of augmentation; now we don't have to wait millions of years for our defects to evolve away. But it goes without saying, people will always abuse it, and there were be those who choose not to use it. It reminds me of the movie Gattaca.


Your terminology is awry; those aren't augmentations, they are corrections. Same deal with the sense of _Amfibius_'s post. The operative word is cyborg; it's been a part of science fiction for several decades. That's SF, not the fantasy crap that has taken its place. Augmentation enhances human strength, agility, senses and/or mental powers.

[Million Dollar Man stuff]


----------



## Weston (Jul 11, 2008)

Hilltroll72 said:


> Your terminology is awry; those aren't augmentations, they are corrections. Same deal with the sense of _Amfibius_'s post. The operative word is cyborg; it's been a part of science fiction for several decades. That's SF, not the fantasy crap that has taken its place. Augmentation enhances human strength, agility, senses and/or mental powers.


Agreed. SF, not sci-fi. There's a big difference to the cognoscenti.

It has long been said the baby-boomers (post war generation) will be the first cyborgs.


----------



## samurai (Apr 22, 2011)

Anybody ever see the movie *Soldier* with Kurt Russell?


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

I think it's probably inevitable. Whether it's good or not remains to be seen, IMO. I could see it both ways.


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

Interesting discussion. I'm sorry I lack time now to watch the doco. But do you think hip and knee replacements are a form of augementation? What about the ancient "iron lung?"...


----------



## Amfibius (Jul 19, 2006)

Sid, given that the iron lung is effectively an iron prison, I don't think it was an advance. If I had to breathe with an iron lung I would rather be dead. Modern augmented breathing is through a tracheostomy - still very disabling, but much better than being trapped in an iron lung.


----------



## Ukko (Jun 4, 2010)

Amfibius said:


> Sid, given that the iron lung is effectively an iron prison, I don't think it was an advance. If I had to breathe with an iron lung I would rather be dead. Modern augmented breathing is through a tracheostomy - still very disabling, but much better than being trapped in an iron lung.


You're the medic, but I'm surprised you consider a tracheostomy as a substitute for an iron lung. I think I recall (it was a lo-o-ong time ago) that the iron lung was used when the diaphragm was disabled. What I think I remember was paralysis by polio.


----------



## EddieRUKiddingVarese (Jan 8, 2013)

How about multi channel hearing, surround sound hard wired to the brain


----------



## georgedelorean (Aug 18, 2017)

Provided it's not forced on people to where we become the Borg, then to each his own.


----------



## Meyerbeer Smith (Mar 25, 2016)

I prefer being human - and I don't want to turn into one of these.


----------



## Der Titan (Oct 17, 2016)

I don't think that healthy persons will ever have the desire to be "augmented". But for medical purposes this may be a wonderfull thing. On the other hand "All good things come to an end" - also this. You will not cure every blind person for example, not in ten thousand years.


----------



## EddieRUKiddingVarese (Jan 8, 2013)

I tried it for awhile but found it wasn't for me


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Ukko said:


> You're the medic, but I'm surprised you consider a tracheostomy as a substitute for an iron lung. I think I recall (it was a lo-o-ong time ago) that the iron lung was used when the diaphragm was disabled. What I think I remember was paralysis by polio.


That's right. Show and tell time at school:

Teacher: Johnny, that a very nice shiny pipe. Where did you get it?
Johnny: I took it from my father's iron lung.
Teacher (concerned): What did your father say?
Johnny: He said, "Urgggghhhhhhh."

Best told verbally, of course!


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

Worked for me:


----------



## EddieRUKiddingVarese (Jan 8, 2013)

The Ultimate in Opera hearing augmentation


----------



## Botschaft (Aug 4, 2017)

I think mind uploading would be better, granting immortality.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Augmentation – there’s been a lot of talk about designer babies. Parents will be able to choose levels of intelligence, physical abilities, and so forth. This will be expensive and will likely accelerate the division of humanity into higher and lower orders. It’s coming, or so I believe.

Naturally, after the fact some will say it was for the best. Others will disagree.


----------



## Tallisman (May 7, 2017)

Honestly my first act as a President or a Prime Minister would be to place SEVERE restrictions on this kind of stuff and the advancement of artificial intelligence generally, so that it is only developed to help those in desperate need of it. It's probably a kneejerk reaction feeling but I feel it deeply nonetheless. Some of this stuff sends shivers down my spine and makes me worried for the cold, mechanical future.


----------



## Pat Fairlea (Dec 9, 2015)

KenOC said:


> Augmentation - there's been a lot of talk about designer babies. Parents will be able to choose levels of intelligence, physical abilities, and so forth. This will be expensive and will likely accelerate the division of humanity into higher and lower orders. It's coming, or so I believe.
> 
> Naturally, after the fact some will say it was for the best. Others will disagree.


The whole 'designer baby' thing is mostly hype. The practicalities are huge and poorly understood, let alone overcome. In theory, the new CRISPR procedures would bring 'designer babies' a step closer, but given how few human attributes could be modified by cutting and pasting single alleles (would you like your baby to produce soft or hard earwax?), most of the claims made for this field of research are fanciful. 
Personally, I am content with spectacles and the piece of plastic mesh that holds my abdominal wall together.


----------



## Botschaft (Aug 4, 2017)

Tallisman said:


> Honestly my first act as a President or a Prime Minister would be to place SEVERE restrictions on this kind of stuff and the advancement of artificial intelligence generally, so that it is only developed to help those in desperate need of it. It's probably a kneejerk reaction feeling but I feel it deeply nonetheless. Some of this stuff sends shivers down my spine and makes me worried for the cold, mechanical future.


You can't be telling us you wouldn't just love to wake up as a machine, or several, for that matter?


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Pat Fairlea said:


> ...most of the claims made for this field of research are fanciful.


Fanciful today, certainly. But the genetic bases of intelligence and other human attributes do, in fact, exist and are likely subject to analysis and ever-improved understanding. The potential economics of this improved understanding are such that research will be driven, and driven hard, toward practical results.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

There are other approaches as well, such as Elon Musk's venture: "Neuralink is developing ultra high bandwidth brain-machine interfaces to connect humans and computers." The company, in the news yesterday, is hiring and has already raised $27 million from outside investors.

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/elon-musk-denies-brain-computer-startup-is-raising-money-2017-08-25


----------



## Tallisman (May 7, 2017)

Improbus said:


> You can't be telling us you wouldn't just love to wake up as a machine, or several, for that matter?


No............?


----------



## Tallisman (May 7, 2017)

KenOC said:


> research will be driven, and driven hard, toward *practical results*.


More likely the decline and eventual death of humanity and all that is good.


----------



## Tallisman (May 7, 2017)

KenOC said:


> There are other approaches as well, such as Elon Musk's venture: "Neuralink is developing ultra high bandwidth brain-machine interfaces to connect humans and computers." The company, in the news yesterday, is hiring and has already raised $27 million from outside investors.
> 
> http://www.marketwatch.com/story/elon-musk-denies-brain-computer-startup-is-raising-money-2017-08-25


Even Elon Musk is getting cold feet about the whole artificial intelligence thing. Recent news suggests he's belatedly discovered that the hole of artificial intelligence development is a deep and indescribably dark one. Stephen Hawking agrees.


----------



## Totenfeier (Mar 11, 2016)

I was one who used to thump my chest and say, "I'll never be hooked up to any machine, thank YOU very much!" But, years ago, after suffering an ultra-migraine that had me vomiting every hour or so 24-7 for a full week, I had a sleep test done and was diagnosed with sleep apnea. I now hook MYSELF up to a CPAP machine every time I lie down, and usually feel pretty good, so I've learned to watch my mouth about what I will or will not do in given circumstances.

And I have worn glasses for fifty years, so...


----------



## Pat Fairlea (Dec 9, 2015)

KenOC said:


> Fanciful today, certainly. But the genetic bases of intelligence and other human attributes do, in fact, exist and are likely subject to analysis and ever-improved understanding. The potential economics of this improved understanding are such that research will be driven, and driven hard, toward practical results.


I don't dispute that such genetic bases exist, but knowing that is a long way from having the means to intervene and implement amendments to the outcomes of those genetic bases. This is complex biology, not commerce, so potential economics may affect inputs to research but cannot so directly affect outputs.


----------



## EddieRUKiddingVarese (Jan 8, 2013)

Tallisman said:


> Even Elon Musk is getting cold feet about the whole artificial intelligence thing. Recent news suggests he's belatedly discovered that the hole of artificial intelligence development is a deep and indescribably dark one. Stephen Hawking agrees.


Elon Musk's is just another of the .com gurus who made money doing nothing and eventually disappear up his own ar$e


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Pat Fairlea said:


> This is complex biology, not commerce, so potential economics may affect inputs to research but cannot so directly affect outputs.


Hmmm... We poured the resources of a nation into the Manhattan Project and went from theory to Hiroshima in less than four years.


----------



## Pat Fairlea (Dec 9, 2015)

KenOC said:


> Hmmm... We poured the resources of a nation into the Manhattan Project and went from theory to Hiroshima in less than four years.


True, but that was directed federal funding, not the commercial funding that would likely be put into human augmentation projects in the USA and Western Europe today. Also, frankly, compared to achieving anything of consistent and predictable 'designer baby' effects through human genetic engineering, making lumps of uranium and plutonium go bang was almost literally banging rocks together.


----------

