Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

When Brains Meet Computer Brawn

Posted by michael on from the steve-austin-would-be-proud dept.

prankster writes "News.com has an interesting story on among other things collective minds and nanotechnology based on the 405 page report "Converging Technologies for Improving Human Performance: Nanotechnology, Biotechnology, Information Technology, and Cognitive Science," from the National Science Foundation and the Department of Commerce. A quote: "The human body will be more durable, healthy, energetic, easier to repair and resistant to many kinds of stress, biological threat and (the) aging process." The story even mentions our favourite enemy - the Borgs."

132 comments

  1. It's not the Borgs.... by Raster+Burn · · Score: 3, Funny

    It's not the Borgs, it's the Borg!

    Do not underestimate an angry mob of Trek fans!

    1. Re:It's not the Borgs.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Defined: The borg is a collective and thus should not really be referred to plurally. Duh.

      of course, real fans would note that it would be 'borg factions' and 'borg hives' natch.

    2. Re:It's not the Borgs.... by Troed · · Score: 1
      "Borg? Sounds Swedish."

      --
      it's in my head
  2. Anyone who thinks Steve Austin is a wrestler... by Bonker · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ...Should be forced at gunpoint to sit down and watch crappy re-runs of 'The Six Million Dollar Man' on Sci-Fi channel for hours on end.

    The real problem here is the 'Six Million dollar' bit. Even if nano-tech gives all the bonuses that some of its developers think it will, it's an expensive technology to develop.

    Those who can pay for the tech in form of life-lengthening drugs (rich white Americans) will reap the benifits. Everyone else will get the shaft.

    Don't think it won't happen. Just look at all the massive shipments of expensive AIDS drugs, condoms, and educational literature on sexual safety that are being shipped to places like Zimbabwe and South Africa where they are desperately needed.

    Oh? What? No shipments of AIDS drugs to third-world countries? Imagine that...

    --
    The next Slashdot story will be ready soon, but subscribers can beat the rush and slashdot the links early!
    1. Re:Anyone who thinks Steve Austin is a wrestler... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      What? No shipments of AIDS drugs to third-world countries?

      What? And get no profit to cover the huge R&D expenses?

    2. Re:Anyone who thinks Steve Austin is a wrestler... by CommieLib · · Score: 2, Flamebait

      Nah, you've missed the point.

      Of course rich folks will get the stuff first. It's just like everything, but as companies produce this stuff, they'll figure out ways to make it cheaper in an attempt to outbid their competitors and make more money. The price falls, everyone benefits.

      Your second point, re: Zimbabwe assumes that the drugs came down like manna from heaven. The fact that they exist at all is due to the fact that some people were willing and able to pay what you and I would consider outrageous prices. Those outrageous prices whet the appetite of investors to pony up more dough for research.

      Don't like the system? The alternative is tax money extracted at gunpoint to run labs that are under very little pressure to produce (see: NASA, NIH).

      --
      If your bitterest enemies are people who hack the heads off civilians, then I would say you're doing something right.
    3. Re:Anyone who thinks Steve Austin is a wrestler... by migrate-HOWTO · · Score: 1

      And...

      --
      God forbid that we should ever be 20 years without such a rebellion. T. Jefferson.
    4. Re:Anyone who thinks Steve Austin is a wrestler... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Exactly. Not only that, but once we have nanotech developed, scaling production up will be cheap.

      It's not at all like aids drugs today. Drug development today is not the whole cost. Manufacturing the drugs costs a lot as well. With nanotech, making more of the product will be dirt cheap. The expense is primarily in making the 'bots to make the 'bots that make the product.

    5. Re:Anyone who thinks Steve Austin is a wrestler... by Rich0 · · Score: 1
      Actually, the cost of drugs is almost exclusively development. The cost of manufacture is best reflected in the cost of a bottle of generic aspirin (sure, some drugs do genuinely cost more than others, but $5/pill isn't the marginal cost).

      The fact that poor people in the US can get generic aspirin is a testimony to the benefits of the current drug development system. Sure, the poor don't get drugs as soon as they come out, but it is usually less than a decade before new drugs go off patent, and then everyone can get them relatively cheap. Of course, by then there is a newer and better version out which the poor can't afford, but ten year old technology is always available to those who are on a tight budget. The US is one of the few places in the world where people that are considered "poor" have TV sets and cars... Some will always have more than others - but if you create incentive for achievement, the poor will always be better off than in a state where nobody has incentive to work.

    6. Re:Anyone who thinks Steve Austin is a wrestler... by timeOday · · Score: 1
      Those who can pay for the tech in form of life-lengthening drugs (rich white Americans) will reap the benifits. Everyone else will get the shaft.
      Better us than nobody.
    7. Re:Anyone who thinks Steve Austin is a wrestler... by Dallas+Truax · · Score: 1

      Zimbabwe has no money. If you want expensive things, you should make the money to pay for them. Expensive Aids Drugs don't go to people who can't pay because no money is made from that transaction. Countrys that have a better social situation and healthcare plans etc, etc, get the expensive drugs, because they can pay for them. ...
      I'm sorry that THAT is the way it works, but the sooner you face it the better. I'm not saying it's humane or right or good... it just is. ...
      The good people of Zimbabwe, and all other good people of similarly troubled countries have to correct their social situation before any lasting relief will come to their land(s). Our money, drugs, jeans, media, food, military can not help them. In fact, these things mostly prolong and increase overall suffering.

      --
      Above comment is personal opinion. Poster is not a spokesperson.
    8. Re:Anyone who thinks Steve Austin is a wrestler... by Galvatron · · Score: 2

      So what you're saying is, this will benefit the rich first, and the poor later, if at all. Okay, as opposed to benefitting no one ever? Africa is getting AIDS assistance. Maybe not as much as you would like, but a HELL of a lot more than if none of this research had been done in the first place.

      --
      "The question of whether a computer can think is no more interesting than that of whether a submarine can swim" -EWD
    9. Re:Anyone who thinks Steve Austin is a wrestler... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As a recent "commons" article that slashdot linked to pointed out, most basic drug research is done by government funded labs - not by the almighty capitalist Gods you worship so much. They just proft from it (without paying back the taxpayer)... they do very little basic research themselves while gaining exclusive control and jacking up prices to obscene levels.

      But hey, the market knows best eh? We can trust the market... it won't let people die just because they can't afford treatment.

    10. Re:Anyone who thinks Steve Austin is a wrestler... by CommieLib · · Score: 2

      I'll break my usual rule of not responding to responses by quoting someone who knows a lot more about this subject than either one of us, economist Thomas Sowell:

      The one monumental fact that is being ignored in all the political schemes to bring down the cost of pharmaceutical drugs is that it costs hundreds of millions of dollars to develop one successful new medicine.

      No matter how cleverly the politicians try to shift those costs around, somebody has to end up paying those hundreds of millions of dollars, if you expect new pharmaceutical drugs to continue to be developed to cope with AIDS, Alzheimer's, cancer, and all the other maladies that afflict human beings...

      Senator Hillary Clinton and other political demagogues make a lot of noise about how Canadians and others are paying much less than Americans pay for the same medicines that are produced in the United States. Apparently all we need to do is to get our prices down to the level of Canadian prices, whether by re-importing these drugs from Canada or by other means. But is that true?

      What is really happening is that Americans are paying more of the high fixed costs of developing new medicines, which then allows others to pay the lower costs of producing these medicines. But if American prices also come down to the lower prices charged in other countries, then the high costs of developing new medicines will not be covered, and a slowdown in developing new medicines becomes virtually inevitable.

      But, by that time, Senator Clinton will have been re-elected -- and that's all that matters, isn't it?

      Those who are constantly pointing to the prices and the practices of other nations when it comes to pharmaceutical drugs ignore the fact that those other nations lag far behind the United States when it comes to creating new medicines. A majority of the most widely sold medicines in the world are American. The United States has more invested in pharmaceutical research than all of Europe put together.

      The kinds of policies in other countries that we are being urged to follow has led to a decline in those countries' roles in creating new medicines. Germany, once a worldwide leader in pharmaceutical research, has fallen far behind the United States, and some leading German pharmaceutical firms are expanding their operations in the United States more so than in Germany.

      Canada, Germany and other countries get the benefits of American research but contribute much less than the United States does to the creation of drugs. On the surface, these countries have a good deal, but in reality everyone is worse off, because the development of new medicines is slower than it would be if worldwide prices were high enough to cover research costs, rather than the much lower cost of manufacturing medicines that have already been developed in the United States.

      You pay one way or you pay another. Paying in needless pain, debilitation and early death is one of the worst ways of paying.

      As someone who knows what it is to be rushed to the nearest hospital emergency room by paramedics because I forgot to take my medication, I am grateful that today's clever political schemes for controlling the prices of pharmaceutical drugs did not exist in years past, when these medications were being developed. Otherwise, I might not be here.

      The secret -- and the tragedy -- of welfare state politics, especially in an election year, is that you can always do some immediate good, right under your nose, at costs that are hidden, ignored or postponed. But those costs don't go away. They can grow even bigger in the dark.

      Too many politicians see prices as just things to be manipulated, the way they manipulate words and emotions to get votes. But the underlying realities which prices convey are not going to go away just because the prices themselves are controlled.

      Price controls in general have a centuries-long record of reducing the quantity and quality of whatever product or service has its price controlled. Price controls on food have produced hunger and even starvation in some countries. Rent control produces housing shortages in cities around the world. Medicine is not exempt from economics -- or from politics.

      The political temptation with pharmaceutical drugs, as with other things, is to kill the goose that lays the golden eggs. But, in this case, that can also amount to killing sick people.

      --
      If your bitterest enemies are people who hack the heads off civilians, then I would say you're doing something right.
    11. Re:Anyone who thinks Steve Austin is a wrestler... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The one monumental fact that is being ignored in all the political schemes to bring down the cost of pharmaceutical drugs is that it costs hundreds of millions of dollars to develop one successful new medicine.

      And you quoted this in an effort to prove what? That drugs are expensive to develop... did I say anything different? The fact is, the biggest costs of drug development are paid for by the taxpayer, with drug companies picking up the small(er) costs to market them and get FDA approval, while getting the *vast* majority of the profits and intellectual property denying useful drugs to millions until the patents run out. So the US produces the most drugs... the US government also invests the most money developing them... you seem to have completely missed the point.

  3. Silly Slashdot by LordYUK · · Score: 4, Funny

    Finally a post that should REALLY have the "borg" icon and you stick a motherboard next to it!! Doh!

    :)

    --
    This is my sig. Its pathetic.
  4. Wired Reflexes? by Renraku · · Score: 1

    I'd enjoy having level three wired reflexes please. Alpha grade. Why? To combat all those damn aimbots on Counter-Strike.

    --
    Job? I don't have time to get a job! Who will sit around and bitch about being broke and unemployed then?
    1. Re:Wired Reflexes? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      AMEN TO THAT BROTHER

      Im still rallying for Valve to make it so that anybody using any detectable cheat is put on a "list". This "list" would be in MY possesion. And I would procede to beat them fuckin senseless. Anybody who posts saying I need to get a life, your on the list too. If anybody cheated on something as STUPID as a sport, most fucks would FLIP OUT. Yet when people cheat at MY pasttime I'm told to just deal with it. Well fuck you cheaters. I'm comin out of the booth.
      Amazingly off topic. Sorry.

    2. Re:Wired Reflexes? by GotSanity · · Score: 1

      Leave it to geeks to bring role-playing into technology.

  5. Is this the right approach? by allanj · · Score: 2

    I'm all for technology, but this looks like an attempt to make the "wonderpill" to cure all human ailments (sp?). I think we should devote some of that energy into preventing some of them, instead of demanding an instant cure for the problems we inflict on our own bodies. You know: stress, alcohol, drugs, tobacco etc. I'm not trying to push the view that you should abstain from all this (well, drugs you should avoid though), but realize that there are no magic cures for the problems these things cause to your body and mind.

    --
    Black holes are where God divided by zero
    1. Re:Is this the right approach? by Hittite+Creosote · · Score: 2, Interesting
      From page 26 of the actual report...

      There must be a free and rational debate about the ethical and social aspects of potential uses of technology, and government must provide an arena for these debates that is most conducive to results that benefit humans.

      In other words, here are the options, now let's debate them. That's definitely the right approach.

    2. Re:Is this the right approach? by bluGill · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yeah, that sounds good, but it doesn't work so great in practice. If it did I'd be in close to perfect health. I don't smoke, drink, in fact I avoid all drugs, and not easially stressed. About those drugs, that includes legal drugs (caffine, asprin) when I can. (I'm not stupid enough to not take those that will help a specific problem when I need it, but I avoid it when I can). I don't snake between my 3 healthy balanced meals. I exercise. I brush and floss regularly. I'm not perfect about any of the above mind you, but I do a fairly good job.

      I'm not in perfect health though. My back is sore, my knees sometimes hurt. Once in a while my bad ankle twists. I have a couple moles to keep an eye on because they could be cancer. I've had my teeth filled. I have several other problems that frankly you aren't that interested in me anyway.

      It is all a normal part of aging. People get older and their bodys degrade. I can still do everything I could when I was 20, but some of it hurts. Experience of others suggests that in a few years that won't be true, and some more years after that I will have to stop doing things I want to do.

      Sure it would be nice if I had done something a few years ago for my knees and back, but both those problems are genetic, others in my family have similear problems. It would be nice if I didn't have a bad ankle, but how was I to know that I would twist it that one day? It is worse to not exercise than to not twist your ankle.

      I don't need a wonderpill, I need something that will work. They could do a knee replacement, but the replacement only lasts a few years, and then they do it again. The second replacement has to last a lifetime though because today's technology won't allow a third. So lets see more research. Not all of it will pan out, but each problem solved leaves me with a working body part that I can use for other things.

      I'm not saying prevention is a bad idea. I suspect I'm healthier than the average person my age. Prevention cannot solve the basic problem of normal wear and tear, but prevention is a excellent part of the solution.

    3. Re:Is this the right approach? by mikewas · · Score: 2

      Do we really have a choice, though?

      If we wish to not pursue this approach, then it requires that all people throughout the entire world abstain. If just one [person, group, organization, government] in the entire world decides to procede, how is he to be stopped? If nanobots are released into the wild, like a computer virus, how do we protect against them? Fail once, and you are infected, become a part of the global conciousness, and will contribute. At the very least you will supply your body as a breeding ground for more nanotech virii.

      Not everybody has the wealth or the knowledge to embark upon this path, but it takes just one person in the billions on the planet -- or two, one with money and one with greed & knowledge.

      Any doubts that this would happen? The US developed the atomic bomb during WW2. Germany was working on it. Recently released documents show that Japan was also close to achieving an atomic device. Today over a dozen coutrys have atomic weapons.

      How successful has the world been at slowing genetic experiments? While governmants, organizations & people talk about whether & how to pursue the research, other researchers announce their accomplishments. The talk of control becomes moot.

      What world power could afford to not follow this approach, if nothing else than to ostensibly gain enough knowledge about the technology to thwart a foe's attempts to use it!

      At best, the technology will just be delayed.

      --

      "Glory is fleeting, but obscurity is forever." --Napoleon Bonaparte
    4. Re:Is this the right approach? by TGK · · Score: 2

      Hey now....

      Let me at least get my replicated food and whatnot before we start worrying about hordes of nanotech devices co-opting my mind.

      Nanotech weapons do pose a rather nasty threat to society. But then so do chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons. But lets look at the biological ones.

      A biological weapon is self replicating, just like a nanotech one. It kills indescriminantly (at least the good ones do) just like a nanotech device (designed to do that). It spreads from person to person, often in large quantities. Yea... nanotech too.

      But wait... You can develop your VERY OWN biological arsonal for less than $10,000!!!! Nanotech costs a bit more than that.

      Yes, a nanotech plague could someday wipe humanity from the earth. I won't argue that. I'm sure it's a possibility (however distant). But more to the point, a perfectly natural biological plague has the potential to do the same... to say nothing of what happens when mankind starts messing with that plague in an attempt to make it even more vicious.

      A little recomended reading on this topic

      Biohazard by Ken Alibek
      The Demon In the Freezer

      --
      Killfile(TGK)
      No trees were killed in the creation of this post. However, many electrons were inconvenienced.
    5. Re:Is this the right approach? by mikewas · · Score: 2

      I was thinking more on the lines of a nanotech virus that adds you to the collective conciousness, rather than something that will kill you.

      The major point I was trying for is that we really can't control this. We can discuss whether or not such a network of conciousness is desirable or not, but if it is feasible somebody somewhere will do it.

      In addition to our not being able to limit this research/implementation. There is a strong possibility that somebody could force the cooperation upon unwilling & in many cases unsuspecting individuals by releasing self-replication mechano-biological entities into the wild.

      --

      "Glory is fleeting, but obscurity is forever." --Napoleon Bonaparte
    6. Re:Is this the right approach? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One great preventative method is nanobots that regularly check you for virii, bacterial infections, and other problems.

      Half of the cure is knowing when something is going wrong. (A stitch in time?)

      Additionally, nanobots that correct the damage to your body from your smoking, drinking, or improper eating will prevent major organ corrections later.

    7. Re:Is this the right approach? by nanoakron · · Score: 1

      'drugs you should avoid though'....

      I like the way you've conveniently separated 'drugs' from 'alcohol' and 'tobacco' as though they're different things.

      'No ma, government propraganda doesn't work on me!'

      -Nano.

    8. Re:Is this the right approach? by allanj · · Score: 2

      'No ma, government propraganda doesn't work on me!'

      I'm pretty sure it does, but not whatever propaganda you have in mind - I'm not an American citizen, and I have never even been to the US. My local government is looking into legalizing mild drugs like marihuana (stupid idea - leads to more addicts), and we're contemplating giving hard-drug addicts free drugs under control to keep them from becoming criminals too (great idea - practically destroys organized crime). My view on drugs being different from alcohol and tobacco is - mostly - my own, and usually different from mainstream thinking.

      Why would sharing my governments view in certain areas be bad, BTW? There are plenty of areas where I do NOT share their views (even though I did vote for them). It's like that with most politicians - you agree with some ideas, and disagree with others. The ones you agree with the most usually gets your vote.

      Your post leaves me with the impression that the "anti-government" propaganda I hear you've got so much of in the US, have really worked on *YOU*.

      --
      Black holes are where God divided by zero
    9. Re:Is this the right approach? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sure it would be nice if I had done something a few years ago for my knees and back, but both those problems are genetic...

      Back problems are not genetic.

    10. Re:Is this the right approach? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Since when has your average Joe cared about preventing a possible health problem instead of satisfying his immediate appetite now that causes the health problem in the first place?

    11. Re:Is this the right approach? by composer777 · · Score: 1

      1. Marijuana is not physicially addictive. In fact, health experts have been so frustrated by this fact that they have invented the term 'psychologically addictive' to demonize this drug. According to the definition, you can also be psychologically addicted to washing your hands, excercising, etc. There has also never been a case of a marijuana overdose, ever. 2. According to US government studies, over 40% of 12th graders use marijuana. This number shoots above 60% by adulthood. If this high of a percentage has used it, where are all the addicts?? In the 60's this number was higher, again, where are all the addicts? 3. There has yet to be any evidence that legality has any affect on susceptibility to addiction. I think it's obvious you've never been in the US. If you had, you would have seen the many blatantly over-emotional commercials demonstrating the purported ill effects of drugs. One of the newest camplaigns flat out says that if you buy drugs you are supporting terrorists, and therefore you are a terrorist as well. Now, I'm going to assume you've been paying attention to world events lately, and that you realize that we're a bit touchy here on the subject of terrorism, and here we have a government calling it's citizens terrorists. THAT's how strong the propaganda is. Murderers get weaker jail sentences than small time drug dealers here, it's really gone that far. Let me ask you a question, what is less expensive, treatment or jail? How exactly does getting raped in prison convince one that life is so wonderful that they don't need drugs?

    12. Re:Is this the right approach? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Back problems are not genetic.

      Most back problems are not genetic, but there are some that are.

    13. Re:Is this the right approach? by allanj · · Score: 2

      You make lots of good points. Really, you do. But I'm not talking about marihuana (is that an 'h' or an 'j' in there?) being addictive - I don't think it really is. It has been shown in my part of the world that the vast majority of hard-drug users started on marihuana. This is a mild "drug" with few side-effects above those of alcohol, so lots of people (wrongly) assume this goes for other drugs too. Then they try hard drugs, like the trip, and (sadly) develops physical addiction in too many cases.
      Apparently, this connection from marihuana to hard drugs does NOT have a parallel "alcohol to hard drugs connection" or a "tobacco to hard drugs connection" for that matter. That's what leads me to conclude that legalizing marihuana might be more trouble than it's worth.

      I don't think drug abuse should be considered a crime in itself, but most drug addict can not afford the drugs, and therefore must resort to crime to pay another criminal to get it. That's the reason why I think that it's better to give addicts drugs for free - under control, and with treatment as the endgoal. By giving it out through the authorities you eliminate a sizeable chunk of organized crime AND get regular contact with the addicts, and this contact is very valuable in terms of starting treatment. You also reduce the number of overdose deaths and deaths from impure drugs, not to mention certain transmittable diseases (AIDS, anyone?). Of course there's an inherent risk of faster escalation when hard drugs are "free", but it's well worth taking, IMHO.

      Judging from your description of the US government's propaganda, I'm beginning to like not living in the US...

      --
      Black holes are where God divided by zero
    14. Re:Is this the right approach? by nanoakron · · Score: 1

      I'm also from the UK. And BTW, marihuana isn't addictive and decriminalisation thereof actually decreases drug usage across the population - or have you forgotten of a little place called Holland?

      -Nano.

    15. Re:Is this the right approach? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      smoke something or vaporize it.

  6. If my IT department is invloved... by scorp1us · · Score: 1

    I'll have massive amounts of down time. I'll lay in bed for weeks. Extremities will cease to function, then start working again, inexplicably.

    Repairing myself would take a close 2nd place to download MP3s and other movies.

    Every part of me woulf be firewalled off from the other to stop the spread of viruses. Unfortuntely, only Miscrosoft products and protocols would work throught he firewalls, leveing me with a vert disfunctional, but effecient virus deleivery system. We'll VPN extremities together, so we'll hide the virus only to unhide it at it's desintation. We'll never know how I got infected because of this.

    I'll then have to pay money per month or per annum just to keep my body parts talking to each other.

    Friends don't let friends install Windows.

    --
    Slashdot's rate-of-post filter: Preventing you from posting too many great ideas at once.
  7. Nice, but... by FFNieko · · Score: 1

    it'll only help humans currently alive. For every newborn the process has to be repeated, i.e. new implants and such.

    Now, if these improvements could be made hereditary, that'd be cool!

    1. Re:Nice, but... by Maran · · Score: 2

      "Now, if these improvements could be made hereditary, that'd be cool!"

      Well, develop things like the Borg nano-probes, and <ahem> inject them during sex. They end up integrated into the baby. Set them to activate when the baby's skin is exposed to sunlight, and voila - instant implants.

      Maran

    2. Re:Nice, but... by Psmylie · · Score: 2

      Not necessary to inject them, they can be delivered through the umbilical cord. Problem is, how do we prevent nano-machines from destroying or damaging a fetus (they might think it's an invading hostile organism)

      --

      psmylie's dictionary: Godzillion (noun) Any number large enough to destroy Tokyo

    3. Re:Nice, but... by FFNieko · · Score: 1

      Well, develop things like the Borg nano-probes, and inject them during sex.

      That's not what I meant, since you'll still have to inject them with every baby. I meant that it'd be cool if somehow these improvements could be built into our very genes, just like the Genome Project in Metal Gear Solid.

    4. Re:Nice, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What, you mean genetically engineer them?

      Genetic engineering can't create brain implants...

    5. Re:Nice, but... by FFNieko · · Score: 1

      That's still not the point.
      I'm not talking about brain implants, I'm talking about altering the human genome in such a way that these improvements aren't provided by nanomachines and such, but by human beings themselves (like genetically modified food has a higher resistance to certain diseases).

  8. Hurrah. by saintlupus · · Score: 3, Funny

    The human body will be more durable, healthy, energetic, easier to repair and resistant to many kinds of stress, biological threat and (the) aging process.

    And sluggish, overweight hackers chugging Mt. Dew everywhere rejoice.

    Well, rejoice briefly, and then start gasping and grabbing for the ol' inhaler.

    --saint

    1. Re:Hurrah. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      hey i resent that! it takes energy to get up and get food! With that fact, I am damn skinny

  9. Linking minds? by Hittite+Creosote · · Score: 3, Funny

    If you've ever looked at an unfiltered list of search entries on Google, then the last thing you'd want to do is link your mind to a thousand other people...

  10. More work for the script kiddies by darrad · · Score: 1

    I can see it now...
    April 27, 2130

    "Microsoft released a patch today to correct the deadly such and such virus, which has claimed the lives of over 200 tech-enhanced workers. MS CEO Bill Gates Jr. claimed that the security breach that allowed the virus to infect so many people was caused by a disgruntled programmer who was fired, but was never unplugged from the MS Development net."

    I would love to see the day when the human mind has the recall capability of a PC, but there is a long road ahead.....

    1. Re:More work for the script kiddies by ThereIsNoSporkNeo · · Score: 1

      "...MS CEO Bill Gates Jr..."

      Yeah right. Gates Sr. will be the first one to fully-cybernetize his body. He'll be with us for the next thousand years.

      We can rebuild him. We can make him faster, stronger; we have the technology.

      --
      With my dying breath, I curse Zoidberg!
    2. Re:More work for the script kiddies by Sobrique · · Score: 1

      Bill Gates, running MS Borg version 1.0 on his own cyber-body? That TRULY would be justice.

      OOps, did you suddenly lock up and turn into a statue in the middle of a conference full of Rabid Unix techies, who then promptly took you for a hydrochloric acid bath?
      That _is_ a shame

  11. Ah Bill by The_Shadows · · Score: 4, Funny

    Of course the tech will only be available to the ultra-rich at first.

    Suddenly the Borg Gates pictues makes all the more sense.

  12. Forced Social Collectiveness? by Choco-man · · Score: 1

    The story mentions the ability to upload portions of a personality to a computer network. It mentions the social benefits. Remember, what ever goes up, must come down. Data streams are a two way street - if you can upload, then it's not a stretch to say you can download. Once humans are collectively linked together for the benefit of society, the real power rests with those who control the computers that allow the linking. Of course the public news release will be heavy on the uploading aspect, but can you imagine the power that would come with the ability to download information, memories, cognitive function, persuasion, etc into a group of people as a whole?

    That's a frightening premise.

    1. Re:Forced Social Collectiveness? by Rhombus · · Score: 1

      Not to mention downloading personality patches and add-ons. Want to be smooth with women? Fearless? A neat freak? A new personality is just a mouse click away. Serious shades of When Gravity Fails here.

  13. This piece is full of ideas.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    but the science is thin on the ground.

  14. Impressive strides being made in this field by Sheetrock · · Score: 2
    I had the opportunity to attend a symposium on a similar topic. One talk, about biomechanoid technology, was quite facinating. Apparently, a joint research project between a tech school (I missed the introduction) and a dot-com startup is starting to pay dividends in this field. They've expanded upon the experiment where an electronic impulse from a wire fused directly to a neuron controlling arm movement was used to control a mouse cursor on a computer screen by a mentally-aware patient unable to speak or move his extremities. The technology being employed is a specially-modified version of WinCE (they mentioned that earlier but less-successful prototypes were using Linux but they hit a bunch of licensing issues) and a VR helmet with a similar interface.

    Apparently, this is already pretty close to being a medical reality, which begs the question of when the rest of us can get some of these units to play Halo directly in our heads! :)

    --

    Try not. Do or do not, there is no try.
    -- Dr. Spock, stardate 2822-3.




  15. Borgs? by superdan2k · · Score: 1

    "The story even mentions our favourite enemy - the Borgs."

    You mean that weird Swedish couple that lives next door to me? I didn't realize that IKEA was an attempt to assimilate me until the article mentioned the nanotech, biotech, etc.

    Anyone in the Minneapolis area need a roommate?

    --
    blog |
  16. excellent by tps12 · · Score: 1, Interesting

    It's good to see that we're not shying away from our ability (and, I would argue, obligation) to improve the human race through cybernetics and nanotechnology. Evolution works great when you have no one at the helm, but with Man's awareness of self, and the related ability to perceive our place in the world around us, we are capable of directing our own destiny. This is why we can (and should!) develop things like electronic enhancements. I look forward to a future when everyone is at least part computer, technology is embraced, and the worst and most dangerous jobs (e.g., soldiering) will be performed by mindless clones grown for the task rather than real people. We alone in the history of the world have the capability of determining our own destiny. Let us hope we don't squander it.

    --

    Karma: Good (despite my invention of the Karma: sig)
    1. Re:excellent by _UnderTow_ · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "I look forward to a future when everyone is at least part computer, technology is embraced, and the worst and most dangerous jobs (e.g., soldiering) will be performed by mindless clones grown for the task rather than real people."

      This may seems a little idealistic of me, but, why not look forward to a future where we don't NEED mindless clones to fight for us. Never mind that mindless clones would make an absolutely horrible, incompetent army.

    2. Re:excellent by idontneedanickname · · Score: 1

      "(and should!) "

      not should, but MUST

  17. Nanotechnology is cool. by Zabu · · Score: 1

    Nanotechnology Here is a Marshall Brains explanation for those who don't know.

    --
    It's all good.
  18. Eh? by Sobrique · · Score: 0

    What they talkin' about.
    We already have a collective intelligence, called Slashdot.

    The prospect of merging minds with a troll, is not a happy one ;p

    1. Re:Eh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not to worry, there is nothing to merge with.

  19. Check out theouterlimits.com by cnelzie · · Score: 3, Insightful


    I believe that they did a story about this in the first or second season. There was this one guy who was unable to join into the group mind due to some childhood accident. He wasn't slow, just a normal person like most of us.

    Anyway, he did his best to keep up with most everyone else reading archaic books, nobody needed to read anymore since they could simply think about the book and it would appear, fully in their mind.

    What ended up happening was that there was a computer virus that attacked the network and started killing the nodes, which were the people that were connected to the network. Apparently, everyone, but a few people were connected into this world-wide network.

    The virus began to cascade across the network killing off people and the protagonist was left more or less alone to stop this virus from continuing.

    I never saw the episode myself, but it sure would be interesting to see how things could have been resolved in a world with a problem like that.

    If such a network were to be created... there will be people that simply have no wish to become one with the group mind. This could actually lead us down some Borg-like path. I doubt that would really be good for humankind.

    I value my individuality and do what I can to avoid becoming "One" with any group. I feel that my varied interests and activities make me a better person. Becoming a huge group mind, being able to experience the experiences of everyone else could take that all away. Why would anyone want to do that?

    Society and life in general would become boring. So what if we could become stronger, live longer and learn more. If all we became were machines to service the group mind, what kind of fun would we have in our lives?

    This sort of thing could happen. If the group mind wishes to experience something, it would compel pieces of itself to experience that for all of the other minds. Once that experience was done there would be a next one. Once all of those experiences were completed, what would be next?

    Would the group mind wish to work on perfecting the human body and human technology? Why not, if you have experienced everything that can be experienced by the time you are 6 years old, the only thing left to do is become perfect, immortal, omniscient and indestructable.

    I imagine that if Paramount decided that a story about how Star Trek's Borg were born, it would very closely resemble that.

    Sure, all of this is pure conjecture, until it happens. Sure, I am talking SciFi, but aren't those scientists talking SciFi?

    Personally, I would have nothing to do with jacking into a group mind. However, something along the lines of a cyberpunk netjack would be soemthing that I would be interested in.

    These scientists seem to be advocating peace by giving up our individuality. For that alone, they should be locked away.

    -.-

    --
    If you ignore the other uses of a tool, does that make the tool less useful, or you less useful?
    1. Re:Check out theouterlimits.com by mabs · · Score: 1

      These scientists seem to be advocating peace by giving up our individuality. For that alone, they should be locked away.

      The US already seems to be on it's way to taking away everyone's freedoms (and individuality), and they have done it well enough for people to think that they actually want it!

      --
      VK3TST
      -- "People aren't stupid. Usually." -- jd
    2. Re:Check out theouterlimits.com by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah I saw that one. It wasn't a virus that was causing all the havoc tho', it was the information-starved computer overseeing the "hive-mind" trying to get new data, however irrelevant that data might be. It turned everyone into obsessive-compulsives who felt compelled to determine (for example) how much pressure it took to bite through their fingernails or how many social security numbers ended in the number 9. The hero, who as you say couldn't hook up to the computer for some reason (I forget why) found a bunch of ancient books with shutdown codes and showed them to a friend of his who was hooked up. The computer, knowing that the books would effectively turn it off was nevertheless compelled to absorb and process the data, shutting itself and the entire "hive-mind" down.
      Pretty sweet episode of Outer Limits actually.

  20. Please learn the correct plural form...... by Tranvisor · · Score: 2

    The plural form of the word Borg is Borg. No s on the end. Kinda like the word moose, ever heard anybody say mooses or meese?

    Somebody hasn't watched enough Star Trek. ;)

    1. Re:Please learn the correct plural form...... by frog51 · · Score: 2

      Everyone knows 'meece' is the plural of 'mouse'.

      But then I am trying very hard to persuade the english-speaking world that 'jamp' and 'glid' are the past tense of 'jump' and 'glide' so maybe I am not the best person to argue semantics and grammar with.

    2. Re:Please learn the correct plural form...... by DChristensen · · Score: 1

      The first time I read this I thought you said that you were trying to persuade the english-*learning* world your particular past tenses...

      I always wondered the consequences of teaching my (nonexistant) children the wrong names for colors or something similar. (My wife is not amused...)

      --

      --
      Mac OS X--Unix without the assholes^Whassles.

    3. Re:Please learn the correct plural form...... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Something I've always wondered about... Color is simply a individual's perception of a particular wavelength.. What I see as blue you may see (in my perspective) as green...

  21. IPR? by Sobrique · · Score: 1

    It wouldn't be a Slashdot story without an RIAA post...
    But how _would_ intellectual properly work with a collective mind?
    One person buys the CD, and all of a sudden, everyone has heard the music?

    I predict that this paper will be banned for violation of the DMCA. It's circumvention of copy protection to share memories of music.

    1. Re:IPR? by mccalli · · Score: 2
      One person buys the CD, and all of a sudden, everyone has heard the music?

      Worse - doesn't even have to be recorded yet. One person has the idea for the music, and you already know it.

      Of course, this does mean the eventual mass-lynching of anyone who writes for N'Sync, Britney et. al., so it can't be all bad.

      Cheers,
      Ian

  22. We are the borg by redcliffe · · Score: 0

    Cool, so instead of having to worry about the borg coming to assimilate us, we can become the borg ourselves, and go an assimilate others! We could have /.borg so we can all be a big beowulf cluster to go after the microsoft borg(tm).

  23. extraordinary claims by sckeener · · Score: 2

    "local groups of linked enhanced individuals" as well as "a global collective intelligence."

    The minute they show me that a bunch of chimps can solve a problem a 10 year old human could solve is the minute I'll believe these claims of a global collective

    --
    "Only one thing, is impossible for god: to find any sense in any copyright law on the planet." Mark Twain
    1. Re:extraordinary claims by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Very true, I suspect the term 'collective confusion' would more aptly describe the outcome :)

  24. Borg as villians by snilloc · · Score: 1

    I know lots of people thought the Borg were far from the best *Trek baddies, but I think this article shows why they were pretty good. It shows what just might happen if we rely on technology a little too much, and what happens when we allow others to think for us.

    1. Re:Borg as villians by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Kill yourself now, you luddite filth. The future has no need for you.

  25. NOT Always 30 years away. by migrate-HOWTO · · Score: 3, Informative
    There is a very informative piece done by K. Eric Drexler who wrote about most of the clever ideas of "Gray Goo" and Nanites in his epic "Engines of Creation". He further goes on to justify (scientifically) the possibilities in "Nanosystems: molecular machinery, manufacturing, and computation".

    The basic premise is that science must first learn how to create machines that can build structures atom by atom (a Universal Assembler (UA)). Once this machine is created, it can build other UA's and will vastly expand the materials and machines that mankind can make while drastically reducing their cost.

    A real world example would be ribosomes in the human body. They are the molecular structures that take their instructions from RNA in cells to make all the proeteins that created us. Not only do they have the ability to make the pieces that go into making humans, but they also have the ability to coordinate the process so that all of the intermediate stages support a living organism! One set of 'Wet' Nanotechnology involves trying adopt the control mechanism that tells the ribosomes what to do. Once this can be accomplished, the ribosomes could make new UAs that are more easily controlled and that can make a wider variety materials than proteins.

    Given that nature got to where we are by trial and errors (albeit over millions of years), it is not unreasonable to surmise that man can reengineer this process for his use (in a much shorter period of time).

    Another important tenet of the book is that Nanotechnology and UA's will one day arrive regardless of what we do to stop it. The premise is that it is important for developed (and hopefully benevolent) nations to be first to create the technology in order to create nano-based defenses against potentially aggressive destabilizing regimes.

    For the text of Drexlers books as well as several other eductional piences on molecular technology, visit: http://www.zyvex.com/nano/

    --
    God forbid that we should ever be 20 years without such a rebellion. T. Jefferson.
    1. Re: NOT Always 30 years away. by Saeger · · Score: 2
      The premise is that it is important for developed (and hopefully benevolent) nations to be first to create the technology in order to create nano-based defenses against potentially aggressive destabilizing regimes.

      Right, and no DMCA-like law is ever going to stop someone from circumventing "replication-prevention technology", just as no law is going to prevent someone from designing DNA-specific viruses, etc. Not even a totalitarian world government in "control" of technology (*shudder*) would be able to prevent this abuse.

      The best solution to the nano-terrorist problem I've heard is one the one where the good guys develop the tech first, and the first order of business is to infest every nook and cranny with an "active shield" - an exo-immune system of sorts.

      --

      --
      Power to the Peaceful
  26. Borg? Pah. by mccalli · · Score: 1
    The story even mentions our favourite enemy - the Borgs.

    Well...I suppose I'm in a Slashdot minority here, but I find the whole Borg thing to be desperately sad.

    Reminiscent of Blake's 7 at its very worst, it is yet another in a long line of stick-a-bit-metal-on-'em no-budget special effects to suggest sci-fi. Terrible. You can almost here some kid wandering round in the bedroom going "I..AM..A..ROBOT" in a unconvincing, poor imitation of what they imagine a metallic voice to be.

    No thank you.

    Cheers,
    Ian

    (should probably state that I don't really like any Trek except the original series and the first two films. Favourite Sci-Fi villains? Hmm...maybe the Sontarans from Doctor Who)

    1. Re:Borg? Pah. by mccalli · · Score: 1
      You can almost here some kid wandering round

      Or even 'hear'. Oops.

      Cheers,
      Ian

    2. Re:Borg? Pah. by arkanes · · Score: 2

      You're a Dr. Who fan and yet you have the balls to point fingers at "no-budget special effects"?

    3. Re:Borg? Pah. by mccalli · · Score: 1
      You're a Dr. Who fan and yet you have the balls to point fingers at "no-budget special effects"?

      Err........don't know what you mean.

      No...the thing is that Doctor Who showed imagination (for most of its life), whereas I think the Star Trek franchices have just bogged down in politics and moralising.

      As to the effects - well, yes there were terrible effects in Doctor Who. But always done with style.

      Cheers,
      Ian

    4. Re:Borg? Pah. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Exterminate, exterminate....

  27. *NNNgh!* by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    With this news comes the sound of Greg Bear readers having orgasms the world over. (Pun intended)

  28. We can't write 1000 lines of code without a bug by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Why on earth would people assume that humanity could pull off anything near this complex and result in something better ?? Different maybe, trading the current set of problems faced by the human race with a completly, and more importantly, new and unknown set of problems to contend with. I don't know, it certainly seems to be overly optimistic...

  29. The Outer Limits by ThaReetLad · · Score: 1

    Does anyone remember the episode of The Outer Limits where the mad scientist invected himself with nanobots designed to make him better? First of all they cured his blindness but then they decided that he'd be more effective with gills and all kinds of other funky mutations.

    Call me crazy, but I'll leave the gills to the fish.

    --
    You can't win Darth. If you mod me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine
    1. Re:The Outer Limits by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Call me crazy, I'd love to have gills... I'm a scuba diver and I've often dreamt about having gills :)

    2. Re:The Outer Limits by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They also gave him another set of eyes in the back of his head, a gooey jellyfish-like outer coating that stung, and a cage made out of bone to protect his belly.
      But on the other hand it made him into a sexual dynamo so maybe it's not all bad.

  30. Sorry, not buying this... by droid_rage · · Score: 1

    ...and the prospect of personality uploads that make death itself ambiguous. I'm sorry, but I refuse to consider myself alive after my body is dead. Death will not be ambiguous, death will still be a static occurence. The fact that a computer can emulate your personality to some extent doesn't make you "alive". BTW, does anybody else see a major issue with even a slighty larger percentage of the population living into the 100's? Don't we have enough population problems already?

    1. Re:Sorry, not buying this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't see how letting people die is an ethical way of controlling population. If it where, why not shut down a few hospitals and refuse to give people medications? Personality uploads can be a slow process of gradually replacing braincells with artificial braincells.

    2. Re:Sorry, not buying this... by eleven+fingers · · Score: 0

      Even if the entirety of the human population is given indefinite lifespan, it is only a problem if we are confined to the earth, and if people keep procreating like rabbits.

    3. Re:Sorry, not buying this... by Kintanon · · Score: 2

      We could always combine this technology with some POPULATION PLANNING.... Hell, fuck the technology, let's just go for the Population Planning! Stop all these fertility drug freaks from popping out 6 retarded premature children, stop 3rd worlders from having 27 children over a 45 year lifespan, while at the same time trying to improve quality of education and life for the people who are ALIVE already... Then we can achieve a stable population, give us all 350+ year lifespans, and start looking at the long term. Plan for colonization of other worlds, etc...

      Kintanon

      --
      Check out JoshJitsu.info for Brazilian Ji
  31. Review on transhumanity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    A review of Converging Technologies for Improving Human Performance, can be found on Transhumanity

  32. The only use... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...I can see for a 'collective mind' would perhaps for paraplegics(sp?) who cannot get out & see the world on their own. But I still think that it should be more of a mind-link to a network instead of a single 'mind' for everyone. The biggest part of being human, I feel, is the capability to be youself. Why would I want to be reduced down to an ant-like (or Borg-like) drone, incapable of my own thoughts? What would happen to innovation then?

    But...anyone read Anne McCaffery's "The Ship Who..." series? Maybe that's a way to go, instead.

  33. MOD PARENT UP! by bafreer · · Score: 0

    Gills would be fucking sweet!

  34. No, it doesn't ! by doru · · Score: 0, Offtopic
    "Begging the question" is a logical fallacy and means building your reasoning on the conclusion you're trying to prove.

    Try "inviting" or "suggesting" the question.

    Not a grammar nazi, just that it's the third time I see it today.

  35. "the Borgs?" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Leave Bjorn's tennis-palying family out of this.

    The plural of "Borg" is "Borg."

  36. One page too much! by Kindaian · · Score: 1

    The report should only have 404 pages...

    Page not found!

  37. Adjust For Inflation by ciaweb · · Score: 1
    The real problem here is the 'Six Million dollar' bit. Even if nano-tech gives all the bonuses that some of its developers think it will, it's an expensive technology to develop.

    Six million US dollars, in 1976, equates to a shade under 19 billion in 2001 dollars. How's that for expensive?

    Numbers courtesy of the Inflation Calculator at
    http://www.westegg.com/inflation/ .

    --
    Try out Phorecast, open-source email, calendar,
    1. Re:Adjust For Inflation by majestyk2000 · · Score: 1

      Sorry, Dr. Evil, I think you meant to say 19 meelion dollars. Or if you want the exact figure, from the aforementioned Inflation Calculator, here ya go (commas added for the aid of the slow):

      $18,993,961.76

  38. Imagine... by Saggy · · Score: 1

    Hmm...imagine a Beowulf Cluster of those...

  39. The enemy of my enemy is my enemy by sbeast702 · · Score: 1

    No way... my favorite enemy is Skeletor...

  40. Anyone ever seen.... by Scrab · · Score: 1

    Ghost in the Shell? I don't know about other people, but when I think of people enhancing themselves with machines, that's the first thing that comes to mind.....

    --
    RoseColor red={0, 0xffff, 0x0000, 0x0000};VioletColour blue={0, 0x0000, 0x0000, 0xffff};find / -name *mybase*|chown you
  41. Bill could use this against us all... by vaderhelmet · · Score: 1

    Could you imagine Mircrosoft buying out this technology and forcing the entire world to run Windows in their mind?!?!?! Didn't he say something along the lines of "Resistance is futile" at his last press conference? What happens when one person gets a BSoD? Will we all GPF in domino-like doom? Will we not be able to eat our pudding with our meat because the pudding doesn't have an MS-signed driver? All these questions and more will be answered on the next episode of... The Raging Psychotic Microsoft-Type Doom Show !

    1. Re:Bill could use this against us all... by bsDaemon · · Score: 1

      ...they may have our wallets...but they'll never have our hearts and minds...

  42. Utopian by scottme · · Score: 1

    How can anyone be expected to take this seriously? To quote from the Executive Summary:


    The press should increase high-quality coverage of science and technology, on the basis of the new convergent paradigm, to inform citizens so they can participate wisely in debates about ethical issues such as unexpected effects on inequality, policies concerning diversity, and the implications of transforming human nature.

    If anything like this ever happens, the pigs really will be flying.

  43. Collective Consciousness = God? by (eternal_software) · · Score: 2, Interesting

    It seems to me that this is the religion of the future.

    When all of human consciousness is merged into a universal network, what exactly do we have? We have a huge, self-aware "organism" that contains all of human knowledge within itself, and is constantly learning and growing. The internet may be the birth of this future network.

    What does this being encompass in a thousand years? A million? A billion?

    In this scenario, the universe slowly becomes a self-aware entity. The universe is conscious. Could this be considered god?

  44. Two words... by Kobal · · Score: 1

    Buzzword thesaurus. I don't know how many of you bothered to read the full report, but most of it far from scientific. Furthermore, it's quite like a sickly mix of XIXth century positivism and XXth century liberalism. Nothing I'd call progressive in any sense.
    Yet, there are a couple parts worth reading, as they're worth some healthy laugh. Like that article written by a guy everyone here should love to hate. Best quote : "I am 58 and I am already thinking about Alzheimer's disease and cancer. The fact that George Harrison has died and was my age makes mortality much more vivid. So, I have a vested interest in accelerating the rate of discovery and the application of that discovery. The largest single voting block is baby boomers, and they would all understand that argument. They may not understand plasma physics or the highest level of the human genome project. But they can surely understand the alternative between having Alzheimer's and not having it." Yup, that's Newt Gingrich writing...
    By the way, don't you feel there's something amiss on their logo? Like an eye or something...

  45. I'm not joining a hive mind . . . by StefanJ · · Score: 2
    . . . until spam filters get a LOT better.

    Maybe the reason that Borg members so much time standing around comatose was that the Collective spent 90% of its processing cycles dealing with a flood of subspace messages offering Viagra, Hot Barnyard Action, and Schlong Lengtheners.

    Stefan

  46. What about the dangers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It seems that the article is focused on what benefits these converging technologies give us.

    But what about the dangers they pose?
    Didn't the discovery of nuclear fission lead to the invention and use of the nuclear bomb?

    Here's a great article which gives thoughts to these , by Bill Joy (chief scientist of Sun microsystems)
    www.wired.com/wired/archive/8.04/joy_pr.html

  47. I'm with Vonnegut on this one ... by JoeBuck · · Score: 3, Insightful

    In "Galapagos", Vonnegut traces all the problems of humanity to our "great brains", and he makes a good case that they are an evolutionary mistake. He wrote it before the Internet bubble, but he would have put that down as another example of a destructive delusion supportable only because our brains are too big.

    The assumption that all these folks seem to be making is that we'll solve all our problems if we can only become more intelligent. What if our intelligence itself is part of the problem? If we just put more intelligence at the service of our raw emotional drives, like our need for sex, power, and to destroy those we don't like, we might just wind up destroying each other more efficiently, or (at best) create our own little mental masturbation worlds.

    My favorite Dilbert strip goes something like this:

    All progress is driven by technology and male hormones. So, when realistic virtual reality is invented, civilization will collapse.

    "Where's Dilbert?"

    "He's been in the holodeck since March."

    1. Re:I'm with Vonnegut on this one ... by timeOday · · Score: 1
      In "Galapagos", Vonnegut traces all the problems of humanity to our "great brains", and he makes a good case that they are an evolutionary mistake. He wrote it before the Internet bubble, but he would have put that down as another example of a destructive delusion supportable only because our brains are too big.
      Who cares? Every other species is already working the issue from the "spawn lots of eggs" angle, meanwhile we're going to do our thing. More to the point, neither of the "undesirable outcomes" you pose is worse than living and dying without ever knowing it.
    2. Re:I'm with Vonnegut on this one ... by Saeger · · Score: 2
      Your quote should be fixed to read: All progress is driven by technology and male hormones. So, when realistic virtual reality is invented, civilization [as we know it] will collapse.

      There was also a Futurama episode (the "Nappster" one with Lucy Lu) where a 50s-style educational film warned Fry that sex with robots would lead to the collapse of civilization, because all that man has accomplished is merely a side effect of trying to impress chicks in order to spread their seed. :)

      Anyway, the fear of change is perfectly normal -- evolution favored those who didn't risk much change, leaving the occasional mutant do so. If it ain't broke, don't fix it, right?

      What you deride as a "mental masturbation world", others, including myself, view as a hedonistic imperative to eliminate suffering in all sentient life.

      --

      --
      Power to the Peaceful
  48. That is because the SA goverment is stupid by sapped · · Score: 1

    The reason the massive shipments of AIDS drugs are not going to South Africa is because there is somebody there called President Mbeki. He refuses to believe that AIDS is a problem. Yes, it all just propaganda. The only thing killing these people is poverty and oppression from the rich western countries.

    And now for the next Mensa graduation step, he is considering wiping out the mining industry. Yes! That should sort out the poverty problem!

  49. Race to the Trigger by seven89 · · Score: 1

    From the article:

    The payoff, the authors claim, isn't just better bodies and more effective minds. Progress in these areas of technology also could play a key role in preventing a societal "catastrophe." The answer to human brutality and new forms of lethal weapons, it suggests, is a kind of tech-triggered unity: "Technological convergence could become the framework for human convergence."

    The idea that some kind of "tech-triggered unity" would prevent a global catastrophe is ludricrous. "Tech-triggered unity" simply means that the future of humanity belongs to whoever manages to trigger it. The race to "trigger" such "unity" would be a struggle orders of magnitude more intense than the arms race of the cold war.

    Also at stake is the health of the nation's economy, said James Canton, a futurist who helped organize the workshop. If the United States doesn't coordinate research into these four technologies, it risks losing its global tech leadership, Canton said. Technology already lets individuals and nations "leapfrog" others, and the combination of nanotechnology, biotechnology, information technology and cognitive science is going to create an "entirely different economy," Canton said.

    It is almost refreshing, in the middle of all the globalist science fiction dreaminess, to see good old fashioned nationalist chauvinism raise its little head. The solution to "leapfrogging" would be to open-source all of the above. To renounce, and encourage all nations to renounce, any sort of "intellectual property" in these areas. That way, no one has to worry about anyone else trying to rule the world with these developments.

    --

    ----------
    Manifesto for the Peoples of the Third Millennium

  50. Ughhh.... by Junky191 · · Score: 1

    The printer can't take much more of this captain-

  51. Re:Collective Consciousness = God? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    watch Serial Experiments: Lain. Same basic concept, asks and explores a lot of the questions you just asked, and it's a great series.

  52. NEWS ALERT: Dog learns complex algebra by migrate-HOWTO · · Score: 1
    (Cairo, Egypt) Local scientists confirm that Woof, a dog owned by Mohammed al-Regimism passed a college level algebra test. Woof mastered language earlier in the year and has not been the same since. "He used to howl all night, instead we hear him prancing around and counting out loud", complains a neighbor, "we don't know how to explain this to our daughter".

    Woof has not been able to return to union meetings since he learned to talk. Slobber Union Local 451 banned Woof when he began to experiment using his mouth for unusual purposes. Union Leader Spark comments: "The manual clearly states the dog mouth is only intended for eating, barking, and slobber. We are pursuing Woof to the fullest extent of the law and will see that he never works again".

    While most dogs cannot fathom why Woof is not content with chasing cars, biting at water, and drooling, others feel that it might be an evolutionary move. "This may be the biggest event since our ancestors learned to drink out of toilets when the bowl ran dry" claims and excited pup who prefers not to be named.

    --
    God forbid that we should ever be 20 years without such a rebellion. T. Jefferson.
  53. OT Re:Wired Reflexes? by Renraku · · Score: 1

    No drek. I saw some TFC spec hackers the other day. One was a scout with a fully-working autocannon (hwguy's weapon), the other was just flying 'round and appearing inside of people, making them unable to move. This is THROUGH Valve's anticheat tech and HLGuard to boot. Not to mention the aimbotting, bunnyhopping soldiers that shoot grenades and rockets out of their ass. CS is worse, you're seen, you're dead. Pistol fights are funny because the people CAN'T unlock from the other people's heads..

    --
    Job? I don't have time to get a job! Who will sit around and bitch about being broke and unemployed then?
  54. How to prevent bad guys from doing bad things.. by Guru1 · · Score: 1

    Read "The Truth Machine". It basically follows the idea that technology will eventually become so powerful and in so many people's hands that it will be simple to destroy all life. So they have to come up with a solution, which ends up being a perfect lie detector test. With a perfect lie detector, they could just ask someone "are you planning on hurting people with your experiments" and find out. Quite a good book in either case.

    Truth Machine Website

  55. I look forward... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...to the day I can do this to someone.

  56. Already happened by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Those tests on monkeys(forgot what species) where they placed wheat grains onto sand. And the monkey picked it up walked to the water and chucked it in. The sand sunk and the seeds floated, it could then pick up the cleaned seeds.
    Now a ten yr old kid would wonder wtf you were doing and why the hell you had taken him/her away from his/here playstation.

  57. Japanese Government Initiative by mattr · · Score: 2

    This report is very timely. I was one of 6 foreigners out of 2500 attendees at a conference in Kyoto recently on the fusion of these fields. AI was not discussed, but Energy and Environment were major topics.

    It is not 30 years away, or trying to make some "wonder pill". The primary points are:

    1. Biotech is currently major driving force in economy.
    2. IT as a tool, not an end in and of itself.
    3. Nanotech (which currently DOES have business applications) is the next competitive landscape. There is a grey area between biotech and nanotech, for example dna motors.
    4. Major need for interdisciplinary efforts to make the most of contemporary science, and the fusion of Government, Industry and Education (which was the title of the conference).
    5. These, and education to create the most creative, science-minded researchers, as key to national competitivity.

    One leadup meeting on nanotech and biotech at Tokyo University Medical School earlier this year was held to coincide with the nanotech conference of the year in the U.S. The recent meeting in Kyoto featured the most famous biotech entrepreneur in the U.S. and the head of MIT's tech ventures program (because Japan's schools are not conducive to spinoffs).

    This is real stuff, even if it seems futuristic. The bottom line is research that is happening today and I expect multidisciplinary, creative thinking is something slashdotters usually respect. The interesting thing is it's not just Japan, there are new nanotech labs being built all over the place (Oxford just built one, and Cornell U. has a new building going up now, just for two examples). This is a historical opportunity, in other words we are stomping on the bottom of the S curve (see page 36 of the PDF). Anyone with similar thoughts, looking forward to your email.

    The future will start in a moment

  58. The Bill Gates Borg icon by metlin · · Score: 2

    Yeah... and here's the quote that Slashdot provides me for this article -
    "Here comes Mr. Bill's dog." -- Narrator, Saturday Night Live ;-)