Slashdot Mirror
Meet The Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technologies (Video)
Discussions about ethics and technology are perennial Slashdot staples. But if you want to frequent a site that is about ethics and technology and almost nothing else, with a strong science fiction bent to it, you might want to check out the Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technologies (IEET.org) website. Here to introduce us to IEET and tell us what it's about, we have IEET Managing Director Hank Pellissier in a remote video interview we made through Skype.
as experience seems to suggest... the goal is the opposite of what is projected..
Not trying to be a troll, it just so much anymore the end result of claims is the opposite.
What a cake job. There is no right or wrong answer, everything is just a quandry.
We really don't like the slashdot original content, nor do we particularly care for video. Please relegate it to idle if you must post it at all.
(Seriously, look at your own stats. How many people actually watch this/read the slashcloud articles? compared to every other article?)
Seems like an exercise in mental masturbation to me. Does it get frustrating teaching a subject that can hold no meaningful answers? For some subset of the population, technology abuse X is unethical. For another subset, technology use X is innovative and empowering, even life-changing. For the rest of the population, it's not given much thought at all.
who want to decide what others should do with their technology rather than those who would actually use technology to change the world.
I pushed pause at "transhumanism" - what a load of CROCKSHIT. why is it that 99.999% of those signing under it are people who can't do anything - but still live in delusional dream that _others_ will invent technology for them to be gods with superhuman abilities. "i'm gonna be immortal lollololo" - well, I got news for you, not gonna happen.
slashdot maybe 15 years old but why the fuck post this shit? is this a joke? is this ethics of fantasy writing? WHAT THE FUCK! LEFTIST PROGRESSIVE!?? anarcho-libertararian-capitalist-feminists whhhhhaatt the fuck? who the fuck thinks it's worthwhile to argue about if it would be cool to live 500 years vs. 1000 years? building a dyson sphere? YEAH! let's discuss that! let's NOT discuss anything technological that could have an effect on people today. like, fuck discussing technology of getting clean water and education(information) to people when you can smell your own farts and dream of being an immortal starchild bitch building a sphere to cover the sun.
you know what this institute is all about? discussing non-existing shit. that's it. you could just as well start a fucking jedi-university or hogwashwarts local chapter.
(I'd start Angry slashdot reader vidblog if I wasn't so lazy and rather spend my time doing something worthwhile)
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
If you need ethics researchers I hear Aaron Swartz is available.
133t
Of course there's a right or wrong response.
Copying (including 3D) is not unethical; the rent-seekers just want you to believe it is, so that you'll feel guilted into paying.
Creating organs from your own stem cells is not unethical. That's what stem cells are for. Killing someone else for their stem cells is more iffy.
Evaluating in the womb is not unethical. Proceeding to kill it if you don't like its features is certainly selfish and at least somewhat unethical.
And yes, I'm posting AC despite your sig plea. Oh well.
Actually solving any problems will be left as an exercise to the readers.
Having suffered through all 12 minutes and 45 seconds of this rambling and pointless Skype video call, I suspect that actually solving any problems is like expecting a result from soft-willy masturbation by a eunuch.
Dear new owners of slashdot, please relegate stuff like this to somewhere else. It's not even close to being "news for nerds".
Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. - Voltaire
TLDW;
Arghhh...
I'm out of here!
Where's the m*****f****** transcript at? (For the 99% of us who don't have time to watch a video.)
which actually has such an institute as a plot point:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Forever_Hero
William
Sphinx of black quartz, judge my vow.
How about growing organs from stem cells... to serve with some fava beans and a nice chianti?
Rights of Non-Human Persons - The IEET is committed to the idea that some non-human animals meet the criteria of legal personhood and thus are deserving of specific rights and protections.
This stuff? Seriously? Can't people just be kind to kittens and puppies? More humane farming? Sure. Why not. But legal personhood? Someone watching to much My Little Pony? Learn the difference between sentience and sapience. The mere perception of individual experience does not grant the ability to reason or judge- two things which are vital for participation in a civilized legal framework.
Yeah, I just pretty much relegated most of the human race to a sub-sapient classification, but, well, what can ya do? ;-)
Under our Securing the Future research program we are assembling interdisciplinary teams of natural scientists, social scientists, humanists, historians, engineers, and futurists to work in goal-oriented projects aimed at proactively mitigating existential risks to humanity and to the biosphere.
Ooo! Ooo! Buzzword bingo!
Research Grants - The IEET is soliciting funds for a grants programs to support the research of IEET Fellows and interns on the ethical and policy issues of human enhancement and other emerging technologies.
Ah! There we go.
hire an ethicist. The field exists to hack standing ideologies and find a means to formally comply with restrictions while circumventing the purpose of them.
Fugue for Aaron Swartz
More amusing than the video, at least.
Fugue for Aaron Swartz
Sure, futurology isn't very important today, but in the future, it will be.
I'm not a fan of what I've just read (the transcript), but you people are really too angry about this. If nothing else, futurism can be a fun past time. Why so serious?
As for philosophy, let's say ethics is where the slightly less talented people get streamed in philosophy. Why? Because people can work with (and against) their gut reactions. Abstract thought is not available to everyone. Unfortunately this means ethics are full of people who probably should be doing some other kind of productive work in society. This misallocation of human resources is due to departmental pressures, so don't be too hard on philosophy itself. I share the cynicism about grant writing and funding, but many of you are working under grants at university, or slaving away for mega corporations, or starving, so where is your pure path to success? Not trying to defend the guy, but sheesh, relax.
The ethics of future technologies is not an uninteresting area of research. If you can imagine a technology, you can imagine what some of its impacts may be. That's not useless. Actually it may become absolutely necessary, in the same way counter-terrorism agencies use creative thinkers to invent novel attacks so they can be mitigated in advance. Shouldn't we try to think through the consequences of our technologies? The world has not experienced a nuclear holocaust, but it sure as hell is useful to think about it. If the possibility had not dawned on us, the world would likely be dead right now. ("Hey, what does this shiny red button do?")
Applying more creative thinking about technology is not at all a bad thing, imo.
That's all I'm going to say.
There are a lot of references to democracy on the website. For example "Democracy provides the other kinds of control, through civil liberties and electoral participation" and "That mastery requires progressive democratization".
I think with that emphasis on democracy, they are starting out behind the eight ball. Research by Austrian School economists, built up over decades, has shown that democracy is unethical. This line of research usually leads to anarchocapitalism. For example, here is a work by professor Hoppe: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy:_The_God_That_Failed
I don't see how a competent ethicist could choose to remain ignorant of this body of thought. Asking around mises.org would be a good way to learn more. Also, to give you an idea of the extensive history of this body of thought, see here (though this is both scholarly research and fictional literature): http://praxeology.net/anarcres.htm
I think it's a big mistake to assume that democracy is an ethical or even a reallistic assumption when considering the post-human era..
I wanted to share this website: http://www.orionsarm.com/
It is a huge body of collaborative fiction based on transhumanism (posthumanism really).
I'm guessing it is a fantastic resource for stimulating the mind and helping to work out ethical problems.
>Proceeding to kill [a fetus] if you don't like its features is certainly selfish and at least somewhat unethical.
It's not really unethical: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evictionism
"This theory is built upon the earlier work of philosopher Murray Rothbard[1] who wrote that "no being has a right to live, unbidden, as a parasite within or upon some person's body"
Nope, I love what I do. I'm not sure why you'd make that assumption based on the tone of my comment. I'm glad that you enjoy your occupation as well, and thanks for taking the time to answer.
Come on, guys. Go borrow FlowPlayer from some porno site or something. Something that actually works, anyway.