Conceptually? I’m all for it. Why wouldn’t I be.
In practice, we live in a capitalist society and I don’t want an arm that makes me watch an advertisement before I open a bag of chips.
All right, you get the chip opening for free, but masturbation requires a paid subscription
And practice on a hotdog first or you’ll tear it right off/start a bushfire.
deleted by creator
Wow, I literally have nothing to add to that. Well done.
Too real man
Not against it on principle, but there’s no way I’d get it knowing about the way the corporations that have the resources to make it happen operate.
As a already augmented human, i fully support this.
Glasses, portable electronic tether, surgery…
Wearable > implantation
Just a security concern. Augmenting is great but we don’t want the augmentations to become a liability. Obviously there are exceptions to every rule, if we invent a robotic arm replacement for someone who’s lost one, the security concerns are generally lower than the quality of life improvement of having a functioning arm 99% of the time, and there’s an argument for the potential ability for rapid detachment in case of emergency, but once we get into subdermal and brain implants, we’re in a territory where these things can’t be easily removed in case of emergency, and the risks get immense.
deleted by creator
Here is an alternative Piped link(s): https://piped.video/watch?v=WyK7lX4sk0c&
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I’m open-source, check me out at GitHub.
I am not looking forward to having my eyes scooped out for a second time because the company providing bionic vision went out of business.
I can’t imagine a faster way to dystopia. You’d be literally incapable of disobedience.
Depends on the implant. I have to imagine the only way this kind of thing could be adopted mainstream is for it to be open source, the risks are just too high to let some random company put obfuscated proprietary tech in your brain
Whatever improves your quality of life I’m all for.
Its a good thing? Prosthetics really help disabled people.
I am in favour of transhumanism, but I would only want a neural implant if it’s fully open source and not connected to the cloud. It also must not break the skin, because I don’t want infections, especially near my brain.
The flesh is weak. Only the machine is eternal.
There is no certainty in flesh except death.
I didn’t ask for this. - Adam Jenson
I think it’ll be cool in like, 50 years once the technology is there. Right now all it does is kill monkeys.
This sparks joy: Augmentation to help people become the selves that they would truly like to be.
This does not: Some kind of transhuman singularity dystopia where we have replaced ourselves not out of a soul-driven yearning for our true self, but in service of a cold, quantitative utilitarian calculus that says we must shed our skin because it is logically inferior.
Both. Everyone is afraid of AI taking over but it’s just a tool. Human augmentation is way more likely to lead there. But in the mean time, Stephen Hawking lived quite a while only being able to speak with augmentations. Just like any other technology, it will be at the very least researched in fear that someone else will first. So might as well embrace it
I’m not afraid of AI taking over. I’m afraid of the TESCREAL suicide cult that wants AI to take over. If they are the ones who ultimately push a singularity button, because they believe it’s a moral imperative to push the singularity button, we’re going to have a really shitty rapture.
Cool for people with disabilities or medical needs. But otherwise I’m not a fan of purely cosmetic/cyberpunk/silicon valley style augmentation.
