Get your fill of sci-fi, science, and mockery of stupid people
* FAQ    * Search   * Login 
Want to support this site? Click

Quote of the Week: "In the United States, the majority undertakes to supply a multitude of ready-made opinions for the use of individuals, who are thus relieved from the necessity of forming opinions of their own." - Alexis de Tocqueville, French writer (1805-1859)


All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 62 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: How much better than a human can an artificial one be? PostPosted: 2012-03-23 05:08pm
Offline
Glamorous Commie
User avatar

Joined: 2003-02-26 12:39pm
Posts: 16895
Location: 差不多先生
Skgoa wrote:
You might not realize this, but we are currently using encryption codes that would take longer to break than the universe existed. Complexity. Is. A. Bitch.

There are still pretty impressive workarounds. Once and if we get Q-computers running, modern encryption will essentially collapse. Not saying that will happen tomorrow, but it can't be ruled out.



For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for nature cannot be fooled.

Richard Feynman

Top
 Profile  
 Post subject: Re: How much better than a human can an artificial one be? PostPosted: 2012-03-23 11:11pm
Offline
Sith Devotee
User avatar

Joined: 2008-03-14 07:47am
Posts: 2848
someone_else wrote:
Quote:
The thing is, if you assembled a human from all these 2.0 organs, it'd be less then the sum of it's parts, as most of the things one organ does wouldn't be needed anymore due to everything else being upgraded.
Why? stuff will change but you still need the same basic functions every organ does to have a self-replicating autonomous biochemical machine.

Brain--> problem-solving to achieve primary goals
digestive system --> acquisition of power and building materials
immune system --> defence from inside and outside microscopic threats

and so on and so forth.


So let's say I write a new Digestive System:
The iGut is capable of dealing with all standard human foods, possess a limited ability to digest cellulose for emergencies, can be programmed for specific calorie controlled diets, will attempt to intercept all known allenergenic molecules before absorption and is capable of purging to eliminate parasites or infection.

I also write a new Immune System:
White Shield is a complete immune response control system. It can be used as a suplmentary sytem to your own old immune system, or better yet as a complete replacement. White Sheild allows you to control your body's response to things, drastically reducing the chance of immune-rejection of your latest upgrade. White Sheild Nanites are non-blood dependent, so they can travel anywhere. Need to sterilise a cut quickly? Just concentrate and then spit on it. Not looking to have children yet? Allow White Sheild to selectively disable the sperm as they pass along the duct. White Sheild can even pass into the heavily acidic zones of your digestive system to eliminate even the strongest of bacteria.


Now - these two are individually are better then the sum of them, becuase they overlap in certain areas. How many layers of protection does my gut need?
That's assuming they're even compatible. Software conflicts are bad enough, i'd not want that conflict happening in my small intestine.



"Aid, trade, green technology and peace." - Hans Rosling.
"Welcome to SDN, where we can't see the forest because walking into trees repeatedly feels good, bro." - Mr Coffee

Top
 Profile  
 Post subject: Re: How much better than a human can an artificial one be? PostPosted: 2012-03-24 06:22pm
Offline
Miles Dyson
User avatar

Joined: 2007-04-05 09:44pm
Posts: 7586
Location: Isle of Dogs
MrDakka wrote:
On a side note; if you can upload your mind to say a computer (with no EMP protection)


Most computers have 'EMP protection', it's called being a metal box, and it's required to pass RF emissions and device interference standards. Modern computers all have power supplies with sophisticated regulation and a fair amount of surge suppression; server farms have very extensive surge suppression and backup power. The only thing likely to die due to an EMP is your wireless networking.

Quote:
and then you're hit with an EMP, what happens? Are you dead? In a coma?


Hard drives are enclosed in another conductive metal box inside the main metal box and SSDs are inherently not very vulnerable to EMP (due to having no magnetic components and insignificant conductive path length for induced voltage). Simple loss of power / someone setting fire to the server rack / hitting the robot with a sledgehammer all seem much more likely.



Image
Image
Windhaven
~ Spirit of Flight ~

x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x

( Trailer : zeppelins, death rays, wormholes... )
( Opening cutscene / voice acting test )

Top
 Profile  
 Post subject: Re: How much better than a human can an artificial one be? PostPosted: 2012-03-25 12:37am
Offline
Padawan Learner

Joined: 2011-07-20 07:56am
Posts: 243
Location: CA
Starglider wrote:

Most computers have 'EMP protection', it's called being a metal box, and it's required to pass RF emissions and device interference standards. Modern computers all have power supplies with sophisticated regulation and a fair amount of surge suppression; server farms have very extensive surge suppression and backup power. The only thing likely to die due to an EMP is your wireless networking.


I realize that modern day computer have some basic shielding. My question is what would happen to the uploaded mind. For the sake of the argument, lets say the uploaded mind is on a computer without any shielding whatsoever. Would the mind be for intents and purposes be dead?

Starglider wrote:

Hard drives are enclosed in another conductive metal box inside the main metal box and SSDs are inherently not very vulnerable to EMP (due to having no magnetic components and insignificant conductive path length for induced voltage). Simple loss of power / someone setting fire to the server rack / hitting the robot with a sledgehammer all seem much more likely.


I did not know this about SSD's. I knew they were more mechanically rugged, but electromagnetically as well? I guess I'll be doing some detailed reading on how they function.



Needs moar dakka

Top
 Profile  
 Post subject: Re: How much better than a human can an artificial one be? PostPosted: 2012-03-25 12:43am
Offline
Sith Devotee
User avatar

Joined: 2008-03-14 07:47am
Posts: 2848
MrDakka wrote:
For the sake of the argument, lets say the uploaded mind is on a computer without any shielding whatsoever. Would the mind be for intents and purposes be dead?


you mean in a building made of wood? in a wooden frame?



"Aid, trade, green technology and peace." - Hans Rosling.
"Welcome to SDN, where we can't see the forest because walking into trees repeatedly feels good, bro." - Mr Coffee

Top
 Profile  
 Post subject: Re: How much better than a human can an artificial one be? PostPosted: 2012-03-25 02:35am
Offline
Crybaby

Joined: 2010-05-15 01:57pm
Posts: 441
Functional immortality and telepathy would be basic goals, easily permitted by physics. On the other hand strength and endurance aren't likely to be dramatically better. These things have solid engineering limits that basically don't allow order of magnitude improvements.

If you're interested in what is fundamentally permitted by physics you're thinking too small, or at least in the wrong direction. Forget about making our bodies better; how about plugging all human consciousness into a shared simulation, that would allow any experience to be generated artificially? This would be functionally equivalent to infinite economic growth. Plus immortality. Actually that sounds rather like the Christian conception of heaven...

Top
 Profile  
 Post subject: Re: How much better than a human can an artificial one be? PostPosted: 2012-03-25 04:02pm
Offline
Jedi Council Member

Joined: 2005-06-25 06:50pm
Posts: 1954
Location: New Zealand
HMS Conqueror wrote:
Functional immortality and telepathy would be basic goals, easily permitted by physics.

Why do you think that telepathy is "easily permitted by physics" ?

Top
 Profile  
 Post subject: Re: How much better than a human can an artificial one be? PostPosted: 2012-03-25 04:18pm
Offline
Miles Dyson
User avatar

Joined: 2007-04-05 09:44pm
Posts: 7586
Location: Isle of Dogs
MrDakka wrote:
For the sake of the argument, lets say the uploaded mind is on a computer without any shielding whatsoever. Would the mind be for intents and purposes be dead?


Data on damaged computer systems is almost always forensically recoverable unless the hardware was thoroughly shattered, burnt or disintigrated. In this case the person is dead in the same sense that a cryogenically suspended human would be if we had the medical technology to bring people back from being frozen; resumption of consciousness requires outside intervention and a complex technical procedure. Of course if they're sensible they'll have offsite backups, and whether recovery from backup is amnesia or a completely different person is a philosophical question. From a technical point of view, there is no difference between doing a targetted delete/rollback to remove that last day of changes from a running system, and flushing and reloading state from a day-old backup.

Quote:
I did not know this about SSD's. I knew they were more mechanically rugged, but electromagnetically as well?


SSDs are electrostatic devices. They don't contain magnetic materials and their internal conductive paths are too short to pick up a significant induced voltage from any reasonable EMP. The flash cells in particular use a relatively high voltage for program and erase operations compared to modern CMOS logic, so even if you fry the controllers the data will be difficult to remove.



Image
Image
Windhaven
~ Spirit of Flight ~

x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x

( Trailer : zeppelins, death rays, wormholes... )
( Opening cutscene / voice acting test )

Top
 Profile  
 Post subject: Re: How much better than a human can an artificial one be? PostPosted: 2012-03-25 04:20pm
Offline
Miles Dyson
User avatar

Joined: 2007-04-05 09:44pm
Posts: 7586
Location: Isle of Dogs
bilateralrope wrote:
HMS Conqueror wrote:
Functional immortality and telepathy would be basic goals, easily permitted by physics.

Why do you think that telepathy is "easily permitted by physics" ?


Image



Image
Image
Windhaven
~ Spirit of Flight ~

x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x

( Trailer : zeppelins, death rays, wormholes... )
( Opening cutscene / voice acting test )

Top
 Profile  
 Post subject: Re: How much better than a human can an artificial one be? PostPosted: 2012-03-25 11:17pm
Offline
Crybaby

Joined: 2010-05-15 01:57pm
Posts: 441
bilateralrope wrote:
HMS Conqueror wrote:
Functional immortality and telepathy would be basic goals, easily permitted by physics.

Why do you think that telepathy is "easily permitted by physics" ?

My computers do it all the time.

Top
 Profile  
 Post subject: Re: How much better than a human can an artificial one be? PostPosted: 2012-03-26 05:36am
Offline
Jedi Knight
User avatar

Joined: 2010-02-24 06:32am
Posts: 854
Quote:
Now - these two are individually are better then the sum of them, becuase they overlap in certain areas. How many layers of protection does my gut need?
Uhm, no. System A has 3 functions, System B has 3 functions. 1 function of both systems overlaps. Total functions of system A + B = 5.
Is 5 more than 3? yes. So the sum of them is better than either A or B.

Otherwise I fail to understand what you mean by "better". :wtf:

Besides, gut flora is the first layer of defence of intestines, well before the immune system is called to act.

Quote:
That's assuming they're even compatible. Software conflicts are bad enough, i'd not want that conflict happening in my small intestine.
As if there weren't issues like that in real life. Leukemia for example.

Having the source code at hand makes these conflicts easier to solve than for biological systems. Although it's likely that MiKrosoft systems will never interact well with Mak ones just because of marketing reasons.



I'm nobody. Nobody at all. But the secrets of the universe don't mind. They reveal themselves to nobodies who care.
--
Stereotypical spacecraft are pressurized.
Less realistic spacecraft are pressurized to hold breathing atmosphere.
Realistic spacecraft are pressurized because they are flying propellant tanks. -Isaac Kuo

--
Good art has function as well as form. I hesitate to spend more than $50 on decorations of any kind unless they can be used to pummel an intruder into submission. -Sriad

Top
 Profile  
 Post subject: Re: How much better than a human can an artificial one be? PostPosted: 2012-03-26 07:23am
Offline
Sith Devotee
User avatar

Joined: 2008-03-14 07:47am
Posts: 2848
someone_else wrote:
Quote:
Now - these two are individually are better then the sum of them, becuase they overlap in certain areas. How many layers of protection does my gut need?
Uhm, no. System A has 3 functions, System B has 3 functions. 1 function of both systems overlaps. Total functions of system A + B = 5.
Is 5 more than 3? yes. So the sum of them is better than either A or B.

Otherwise I fail to understand what you mean by "better". :wtf:

Besides, gut flora is the first layer of defence of intestines, well before the immune system is called to act.

Quote:
That's assuming they're even compatible. Software conflicts are bad enough, i'd not want that conflict happening in my small intestine.
As if there weren't issues like that in real life. Leukemia for example.

Having the source code at hand makes these conflicts easier to solve than for biological systems. Although it's likely that MiKrosoft systems will never interact well with Mak ones just because of marketing reasons.


3+3=6
3&3=5 (the sum of the total is less then the sum of the individual parts)

but when you have 12 or 100 separate organs each with small degrees of overlap, the EXTRA you get for each $ effort is a little bit less with each new organ. Whilst a single 2.0 organ is a huge benefit, there comes a point when it's not worth replacing anything more.

there wouldn't be any gut flora, becuase iGut works on different principles and avoids such 'dangerous' buildups of bactera insdie you.

as for conflicts - yup, definitely solvable, I'm sure such easily solved problems have never caused me to have to wipe my computer and reinstall everything.



"Aid, trade, green technology and peace." - Hans Rosling.
"Welcome to SDN, where we can't see the forest because walking into trees repeatedly feels good, bro." - Mr Coffee

Top
 Profile  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 62 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Enigma, Google [Bot] and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group