Monthly Archives: June 2021

He writes that great care must be taken when humans experiment with transhuman and posthuman techniques. Paul Budde..

For those involved in technology from a government and industry perspective, as well as from a user perspective, we all have a responsibility to monitor the development of this area and ensure that it is being used for the benefit of society.

If you bring people from Stone ageEarly peasants from MesopotamiaWhen the Greek philosopher, the Florentine Renaissance merchant and one of us blindfolded and started chatting around the campfire, we soon realized that we had a lot in common.

After a few pints, we sing together and soon end up in a cheerful hug. At this level, human evolution has changed little.

Benefits and risks of AI and posthuman life

Philosophers involved in the theory of posthumanism and transhumanism are fascinated by the possibilities or dangers that the future brings to the understanding of human life.

What has changed is the environment in which we live using the tools we have developed. If you dig a little deeper here, its amazing to see that with the help of technology, the quality of life for humans has improved significantly. Even more daunting is the fact that most of it has happened in the last 50 years.

Our consciousness is what makes us human. Ongoing unprecedented technological developments allow us to increasingly reduce our dependence on the body, transplant organs, and other tools enhance our biological and cognitive function. can.

If these developments continue, why do we need a body? Aristoteles I asked the same question about 2,500 years ago.

Returning to the meetings around the campfire, even with its various group chats, we still cant find the answer to the big questions in life.

We cannot discover the exact meaning of life, free will, what the truth is, and so on. Nowadays, you can add issues of democracy, fake news, conspiracy theory, social media echo chambers, populism, and totalitarianism to the list. The human mind does not seem ready to tackle them.

What do you need to improve the current situation?

If history is a good measure, it is doubtful that humans 10,000 years from now will be very different from us. But our cognitive limits are already a problem for the great crisis we are facing today, not to mention the future.

It is not technology that prevents us from tackling these major issues, but human cognitive limitations in dealing with these situations.

But we are clearly at the forefront of inflection points as new technologies are being developed that change the meaning of being human.

The increasing number of tools today seems to enhance our cognitive abilities. For centuries and thousands of years, we are certain that our tool manufacturing capabilities will be greater and create a better environment. It would be difficult to claim that humans remain the same.

The tools we are creating and other developments around the corner show a logical and rational direction. Transhumanism..

So far, we have been able to keep control of the technology we have developed. But machine learning, DNA engineering, biotechnology, neurotechnology, and self-learning algorithms and developments of quantum mechanisms related to our consciousness are all opening Pandoras box.

Can we still maintain control? As a global society, there seems to be a lack of cognitive quality needed to manage these processes in the long run.

If we work to improve our cognitive qualities, we need to do this jointly. Alternatives can be catastrophic.

Do you need a crisis first to build a global consensus? Is it too late? Does our innate fighting instinct lead to selected groups of transhumanism?

As both Stephen hawking And Ray Kurzweil As we insist, we need to face these challenges. Otherwise, you will be defeated by transhumans and posthumans arriving at the scene.

Professor Stuart Russell Lists three principles that guide the development of profitable machines. He emphasizes that these principles are not intended to be explicitly coded on the machine. Rather, they are aimed at human developers.

Artificial intelligence is increasing

Paul Budde states that new developments and opportunities are being opened up in artificial intelligence.

The principles are as follows:

Instead of using artificial intelligence or other technologies to solve complex problems, we need to focus on developing better-equipped technologies to solve these problems faster and more effectively. ..

Last week the Australian Government Announcement We want to be a global leader in the development and adoption of responsible artificial intelligence (AI). This has secured $ 124.1 million. For this National Artificial Intelligence Center Within CSIRO, there are four AI and Digital Function Centers and a Next Generation AI Alumni Program.

Expect to adhere to the above principles to further develop unstoppable transhuman and potentially posthuman technologies while humans are still responsible.

Paul Budde Independent Australian columnist and Paul Budde Consulting, An independent telecommunications research and consulting organization. Follow Paul on Twitter @PaulBudde..

Read the original post:

Technologies that change human nature must be treated with caution - Illinoisnewstoday.com

Extreme caution must be taken when humans experiment with transhuman and posthuman technology, writes Paul Budde.

FOR THOSE INVOLVEDin technology from a government and industry perspective,as well asfrom a users point of view, we all have a responsibility to monitor developments in this space to ensure they're utilised for the benefit of society.

If we brought a person from the Stone Age, an early farmer from Mesopotamia, a Greek philosopher, a Renaissance merchant from Florence and one of us together, blindfolded, and we started chatting around a campfire, we would very quickly find out we have a lot in common.

After a few pints, we will sing together and rapidly end up in some jovial embracing. At this level, very little has changed in the evolution of humans.

What has changed is the environment we live in using the toolswe've developed. To dig a bit deeper here, it is amazing to see that with the assistance of technology, the quality of human life has enormously improved. Even more mindboggling is the fact that most of that happened in the last 50 years.

Our consciousness is what makes us human. With the ongoing and ever faster technologicaldevelopments, we are less and less dependent on our body, organs can be transplanted, and other tools can enhance our biological and cognitive functions.

If these developments continue, why would we need a body? Aristotle asked that same question about 2,500 years ago.

Coming back to the meeting around the campfire, evenwith that varied group chatting, we still would not be able to find answers to the big questions of life.

We wouldn't discover the exact meaning of life, free will, what is truth and so on. In contemporary times, we can add issues of democracy, fake news, conspiracy theories, social media echo chambers, populismand totalitarianism to the list. It looks like the human mind isill-prepared to tackle them.

What is needed for us to improve on our current situation?

If history is a good measure, then it is doubtful that humans in another 10,000 yearstime would be much different from us. Though, our cognitive limitations are already a problem for the big crises facing us today, let alone in the future.

It is not the technology that stops us from addressing these major issues, but the cognitive limitations of humans to deal with these situations.

But we clearly are at the doorstep of an inflection point, as new technology develops to change what it means to be human.

The tools on the rise today would seem to enhance our cognitive capacities. Over centuries and millennia, it is certain that our tool-making capacity will create bigger and better environments. It'll be harder to argue that humans will remain the same.

The tools we are creating and other developments that are around the corner indicate a logical and rational direction towards transhumanism.

So far, we have been able to stay in control of the technology we have developed. However, self-learning algorithms and developments in machine learning, DNA engineering, biotechnics, neuro-technologies and quantum mechanisms relatingto our consciousness are all opening Pandora's box.

Can we still stay in control? It looks like that, as a global society, we seem to lack the cognitive quality needed to manage these processes in the long term.

If we work on lifting our cognitivequalities, we need to do this together, in a collaborative way.The alternative could be catastrophic.

Do we first need a crisis to build global consensus? Will that be too late? Will our innate warring instincts lead to selected groups of transhumans?

As both Stephen Hawkingand Ray Kurzweil have argued, we need to face these challenges, otherwise we will be outcompeted by whatever transhumansor posthumans that'll arrive on the scene.

Professor Stuart Russelllists three principles to guide the development of beneficial machines. He emphasises that these principles are not meant to be explicitly coded into the machines; rather, they are intended for the human developers.

The principles are as follows:

We should not use artificial intelligenceand other technologies to solve our complex problems, instead, we should concentrate on developing technologies that equip us better to solve these problems faster and more effectively.

Last week, the Australian Government announced that it wants to become a global leader in developing and adopting responsible artificial intelligence (AI). For this, $124.1 million has been set aside which includes the establishment of a National Artificial Intelligence Centre within the CSIRO, four AI and digitalcapability centres, and a next generation AI graduates program.

Let us hope that humans, while still in charge, will adhere to thoseprinciples set out above, to further developalready unstoppable transhumanand potentially posthuman technologies.

Paul Buddeis an Independent Australia columnist and managing director ofPaul Budde Consulting, an independent telecommunications research and consultancy organisation. You can follow Paul on Twitter@PaulBudde.

Support independent journalism Subscribeto IA.

Original post:

Technology changing human nature must be treated with caution - Independent Australia

Premiering their latest futuristic audiovisual project, JG and the Robots have unveiled the official music video for "Im Thomas Dolby (feat. Deepfake Thomas Dolby)."

Exploring themes of transhumanism and sentience, JG and the Robots is a conceptual EDM multimedia experience that blends AI technologies with dance music performance and film. Its leader performs as a RoboSapien cyborg, accompanied by various other robots. The minds behind the ambitious project have now dropped their newest video, which utilizes "deepfake" artificial intelligence and computer-generated vocals to reconstruct the prominent 80s musician Thomas Dolby.

Dolby, who cooperated with the innovative project, is credited as the vocalist for the track, which is the second in an ongoing series from JG and the Robots to flesh out the project. Check out the official"Im Thomas Dolby" video below, featuring a disco-inspired house beat and vocoded vox from a digitized version of the famed singer.

JG and the Robots'Jay Gillian first achieved recognition as the mind behind synthpop duo T-4-2, a major electronic act out of Texas. Combining synthesizers, drum machines, and computerized production, T-4-2 released their debut album Shockra in 1984.

After the tandem's vocalist Jimron Goff departed in 1988 and was replaced by Will Loconto, they dropped their Hot on Top record to local acclaim in 1989. Oak Lawn Records eventually picked up T-4-2 for the 12 single "Dont Let My Love (Push You Away)" the following year, leading to the duo's signing to Columbia Records and eventually their 1992 Intruder album.

Ultimately Gillian decided to conceptualize and launch JG and the Robots, perhaps his most ambitious project yet. JG and the Robots connected with record label and arts collective eMERGENCY heARTS in 2019, producing a 30th anniversary remix for Lesson Seven before joining the Austin, Texas co-op the following year. Spearheaded by critically acclaimed musician, author, and public speakerscott crow, the eMERGENCY heARTS catalogue spotlights a wide range of both new and vintage electronica.

JG and the Robots are set to make their first live appearance of 2021 at Numbers Nightclub in Houston, Texas, on July 3rd. T-4-2 will also perform at the venue on the 24th and will open for Gary Numan there in September.

Website: jgandtherobots.comFacebook: facebook.com/JgAndTheRobotsSpotify: spoti.fi/2UdRcMY

Read the rest here:

JG and the Robots Unveil AI-Driven Audiovisual for "Im Thomas Dolby" - EDM.com

Fresh and dried psilocybin mushroom, gelcaps and digital pocket scale on black background, top view. ... [+]

Psychedelic use is no longer a relatively small, counterculture phenomenon. Indeed, by microdosing, tech workers and many career strivers seem to be infusing psychedelics into the brave, new, somewhat middle class and much larger world of social and professional ladder climbing.

Microdosing is defined as the regular use of a psychedelic drug (a/k/a hallucinogen) at amounts so tiny as to be impossible to consciously perceive. This generally translates into 1/10 1/20 of a recreational dose. Many enthusiasts swear by microdosings positive effect on mood, insight, and creativity. Studies that rely on self-reporting have tended to bolster such anecdotal claims, but other evidence suggests that the effects of microdosing are illusory. For example, in one double-blind study, microdosing improved users mood, energy, and creativity but so did the placebo.

A 2019 article published in the peer-reviewed journal Pharmacology described the type of person who microdoses. As spelled out in Microdosing Psychedelics: Personality, Mental Health and Creativity Differences in Microdosers, researchers from several Toronto institutions gave psychological questionnaires and a task of creativity to roughly 900 adults. Of these participants 29% were microdosing, 37% had microdosed in the past but had since stopped (former microdosers), 30% were interested in microdosing but had no prior experience, and a shockingly tiny 4% had no prior experience and reported not being interested in microdosing. From the questionnaires and the performance on the creativity task, the researchers concluded that, on average, microdosers had lower negative emotionality, higher wisdom and open-mindedness, higher creativity, and more positively charged emotions.

If the sheer volume of press is any measure, interest in microdosing is surging, and getting a leg up in ones career seems to be a major motivator.

Popular psychedelics being microdosed include LSD (lysergic acid diethylamide), magic mushrooms (containing the active ingredient psilocybin), and DMT, also known asDimitri (which is found in ayahuasca tea). The amphetamine known as ecstasy (MDMA,molly, and E), which also has psychedelic effects, can be microdosed.

Dimitrios Liokaftos, Wellcome Trust Research Fellow at the Public Health Institute, Liverpool John ... [+] Moores University

Dimitrios Liokaftos is a Wellcome Trust Research Fellow at the Public Health Institute, Liverpool John Moores University in the UK. In a recentcommentary published in the International Journal of Drug Policy, he placed microdosing in context as an emerging and controversial facet of human enhancement through drugs.

For Forbes.com, Rebecca Coffey met on Zoom with Liokaftos to discuss the culture and sociological implications of microdosing. The interview has been edited for length and clarity, and Liokaftos has suggested links as appropriate.

Rebecca Coffey: In yourInternational Journal of Drug Policyarticle, you mentioned that research shows microdosing tends to be aligned with middle-class or neoliberal values. Can you tell me more about what you mean by that?

Dimitrios Liokaftos: Back in the 1960s and 70s, the typical recreational psychedelics user used full doses and might have been trying for a loss of control and a melting away of the self. Today, people who microdose do so as a means of heightening their control of themselves. Contrary to recreational use in the 60s and 70s that was perceived by many as chaotic, ecstatic and risky, microdosing appears subtle, measured and rational. People seem to be seeking an elusive, very fine experience. Theres nothing tumultuous about it.

RC: When you say that microdosing is elusive, do you mean that this way of using psychedelic drugs has no real effect?

DL: Thats still a subject of investigation. Even though recent research suggests the entire effect may be placebo-generated, microdosers usually attest to a subtle effect that helps them achieve their work, emotional and creative goals. I see many parallels between bodybuilding and microdosing here. Bodybuilders, like microdosers, set very clear goals for themselves. In terms of their recent cultural past, both bodybuilding and psychedelics seem to share a relatively common root. The crazes started in the 60s and 70s. Especially in the United States, they intersected with the human potential movement [in which people sought to unleash their untapped creativity and capabilities and then altruistically help others to do the same]. In a way, they were both an exploration of what it means to be human. The people within those cultures were testing the boundaries of human possibility.

RC: Nicely said.

DL: Of course, from another perspective, bodybuilding culture and psychedelic culture back in the 60s and 70s were almost the exact opposite of each other. Bodybuilding was very much about creating a very strong, solid, visible reflection of ego. Psychedelics users, on the other hand, were often trying to dissolve their egos and break down their defenses.

MELBOURNE, AUSTRALIA - MARCH 10: Dexter Jackson of the USA strikes a pose during the 2007 IFBB ... [+] Australian Bodybuilding Grand Prix VII in, 2007 in Melbourne, Australia. (Photo by Robert Cianflone/Getty Images)

RC: In the 60s and 70s, the recreational doses of common psychedelics were much stronger than what a microdoser uses today. Can you talk about the implications of that?

DL: Like bodybuilding, microdosing seems to be about expanding and perfecting ones capabilities. Both groups are sophisticated about how they go about doing that. Bodybuilders will tell you that theyre not just indiscriminately using drugs. They're very precise about what steroids or other image- and performance-enhancing drugs they use for what purposes, about how they time and fine-tune their drug use, and about how they combat side effects. Microdosers will tell you that they dont use very much drug. They often seem proud of how educated and particular they are about their use of psychedelics. Both groups of people would argue they know what they want to achieve and then they very instrumentally go about minimizing potential harms.

RC: And what about these groups in relation to people outside their cultures?

DL: In many ways, people inside these cultures share a view of the outside world as discriminating against them or relying on stereotypes. From their perspective, the lay public has a limited understanding and an abundance of disapproval about what theyre up to. Bodybuilders may assume people will generally look down on them or look with disdain on their freaky bodies. They may assume that people will consider what has been painstakingly built with a fine attention to detail and a doggedness about self-discipline to be the product of drugs and nothing more. So many bodybuilders who are using drugs keep their use secret.

RC: And are microdosers shy about revealing the source of what they believe is their heightened creativity or cognitive flexibility?

DL: Many are, depending on who it is they are talking to. However, norms here may be changing as psychedelics increasingly become more mainstream.

RC: As you said, with microdosing we still don't know exactly how it works or even if it works, so it might be easy for stereotypes about drug users to cloud our view.

DL: As we all learn about microdosing, we may find that psychedelics in general can be approached as a tool for understanding the human brain and the concept of self. Studies with full-dosed psychedelics show that they can have lasting positive effects on mood and some people report life-transformative mystical experiences. This suggests that in some measure these substances can create a fundamental change in the perception of self. Investigating that will have implications not only for brain and neuroscience but also for psychology, philosophy, and sociology.

RC: Do you anticipate any dangerous political or sociological ramifications of microdosing? For example, considering that its reportedly often used in Silicon Valley and throughout the tech world, do you wonder about the creation of a neoliberal, ruling superclass?

DL: Thats a very interesting question. For the sake of argument, let's say that the effect of microdosing turns out to be not all imagined or placebo-generated. Lets say that more people want to use it to increase their performance at work and maybe their social standing. Immediately, I see questions similar to those I see associated with other kinds of human enhancement drugs. For example, will common use lead to an indirect pressure for people to use psychedelics just in order to keep up with colleagues at work and remain competitive in their professional fields? And then theres the potential debate about who gets access to what kinds of drugs. Psychedelics are internationally still highly controlled substances. Who will be able to find them and take them? Who will be able to afford to risk the legal penalties or social ramifications? We could expect people with better connections, more money and better education to have an advantage. This means that, in a sense, by using tiny doses of psychedelics in hopes of improving themselves, todays microdosers may be shaping a new playing field for tomorrow. And right now there is also the question of safety. Because aside from enrolling in a few very tightly controlled studies, most microdosers will be sourcing their psychedelics on the black market. These arent necessarily good-quality drugs. No one can be 100% sure with black market drugs what it is that theyre consuming. In this sense people are taking on real health risks.

A humanoid robot on display at the 2018 Humain Demain (Human Tomorrow) exhibition about technology, ... [+] connected body, ethics, and DNA at the 'Quai des Savoirs' museum in Toulouse, France.

RC: What you're describing here is a new rat race, not an enhancement of the human experience. Is anybody using the word transhumanism by which I mean the development of science fiction-like technologies that could improve health, extend life spans, smooth out emotions, and perfect artistic abilities and cognitive capacity?

D: Transhumanism seems to be mostly about technological enhancements, while most psychedelics are naturally occurring substances. For example, you can just go out in a forest where psychedelic mushrooms grow and pick up some yourself. You dont need to wait for technologies of the future to arrive. But the underlying logic is not dissimilar. Both transhumanism and the use of existing human enhancement drugs are about pushing the boundaries of what it means to be human. Microdosing has a bit of anavant-gardemystique around it, as though it is leading the way towards a new era for humanity. In the 60s, some psychedelics users hoped to change an unjust world in a radical way. Today, people microdose to perfect themselves and meet the demands of what is still an unjust world. Thats an enormous shift in perspective and intention.

RC: I want to thank you for your insight. It's been invaluable to learn about the inroads that psychedelics are making into our society and the ways in psychedelic use today is vastly different from the psychedelic use of yesterday. I, for one, will be fascinated to watch the degree to which microdosing creates a gentrification of psychedelics, with the influx of affluent and ambitious people into a neighborhood of drug use that was once defined by its inhabitants rejection of affluence and ambition.

Liokaftos' current research looks at microdosing psychedelics as a new facet of human enhancement drugs. The Twitter account for the project is @microdresearch.

Link:

Microdosing, And The Gentrification Of Psychedelic Culture. A Conversation With Sociologist Dimitrios Liokaftos - Forbes