The Prometheus League
Breaking News and Updates
- Abolition Of Work
- Ai
- Alt-right
- Alternative Medicine
- Antifa
- Artificial General Intelligence
- Artificial Intelligence
- Artificial Super Intelligence
- Ascension
- Astronomy
- Atheism
- Atheist
- Atlas Shrugged
- Automation
- Ayn Rand
- Bahamas
- Bankruptcy
- Basic Income Guarantee
- Big Tech
- Bitcoin
- Black Lives Matter
- Blackjack
- Boca Chica Texas
- Brexit
- Caribbean
- Casino
- Casino Affiliate
- Cbd Oil
- Censorship
- Cf
- Chess Engines
- Childfree
- Cloning
- Cloud Computing
- Conscious Evolution
- Corona Virus
- Cosmic Heaven
- Covid-19
- Cryonics
- Cryptocurrency
- Cyberpunk
- Darwinism
- Democrat
- Designer Babies
- DNA
- Donald Trump
- Eczema
- Elon Musk
- Entheogens
- Ethical Egoism
- Eugenic Concepts
- Eugenics
- Euthanasia
- Evolution
- Extropian
- Extropianism
- Extropy
- Fake News
- Federalism
- Federalist
- Fifth Amendment
- Fifth Amendment
- Financial Independence
- First Amendment
- Fiscal Freedom
- Food Supplements
- Fourth Amendment
- Fourth Amendment
- Free Speech
- Freedom
- Freedom of Speech
- Futurism
- Futurist
- Gambling
- Gene Medicine
- Genetic Engineering
- Genome
- Germ Warfare
- Golden Rule
- Government Oppression
- Hedonism
- High Seas
- History
- Hubble Telescope
- Human Genetic Engineering
- Human Genetics
- Human Immortality
- Human Longevity
- Illuminati
- Immortality
- Immortality Medicine
- Intentional Communities
- Jacinda Ardern
- Jitsi
- Jordan Peterson
- Las Vegas
- Liberal
- Libertarian
- Libertarianism
- Liberty
- Life Extension
- Macau
- Marie Byrd Land
- Mars
- Mars Colonization
- Mars Colony
- Memetics
- Micronations
- Mind Uploading
- Minerva Reefs
- Modern Satanism
- Moon Colonization
- Nanotech
- National Vanguard
- NATO
- Neo-eugenics
- Neurohacking
- Neurotechnology
- New Utopia
- New Zealand
- Nihilism
- Nootropics
- NSA
- Oceania
- Offshore
- Olympics
- Online Casino
- Online Gambling
- Pantheism
- Personal Empowerment
- Poker
- Political Correctness
- Politically Incorrect
- Polygamy
- Populism
- Post Human
- Post Humanism
- Posthuman
- Posthumanism
- Private Islands
- Progress
- Proud Boys
- Psoriasis
- Psychedelics
- Putin
- Quantum Computing
- Quantum Physics
- Rationalism
- Republican
- Resource Based Economy
- Robotics
- Rockall
- Ron Paul
- Roulette
- Russia
- Sealand
- Seasteading
- Second Amendment
- Second Amendment
- Seychelles
- Singularitarianism
- Singularity
- Socio-economic Collapse
- Space Exploration
- Space Station
- Space Travel
- Spacex
- Sports Betting
- Sportsbook
- Superintelligence
- Survivalism
- Talmud
- Technology
- Teilhard De Charden
- Terraforming Mars
- The Singularity
- Tms
- Tor Browser
- Trance
- Transhuman
- Transhuman News
- Transhumanism
- Transhumanist
- Transtopian
- Transtopianism
- Ukraine
- Uncategorized
- Vaping
- Victimless Crimes
- Virtual Reality
- Wage Slavery
- War On Drugs
- Waveland
- Ww3
- Yahoo
- Zeitgeist Movement
-
Prometheism
-
Forbidden Fruit
-
The Evolutionary Perspective
Category Archives: Transhuman News
Political correctness attacks the entire learning process – Washington Examiner
Posted: August 11, 2017 at 5:43 pm
The diversity memo written by a now-fired Google engineer instigated days of debate this week, sparking a vibrant conversation about sex and censorship. But the memo, and Google's reaction to it, also provided an opening for a discussion too seldom had even by the staunchest advocates of free expression.
The culture of political correctness doesn't only censor people's beliefs, it attacks the very process by which we arrive at them.
Nick Gillespie explored how the controversy surrounding the Google memo illustrates this in Reason. "Political correctness has in many ways stymied any sort of good-faith conversation about issues touching on race, class, gender, and other highly charged topics," he observed.
Gillespie, writing from the libertarian perspective, contrasted the arrogance of the philosophy behind political correctness with the "epistemological humility" of libertarianism. "Libertarianism is ultimately grounded not in anything like knowable, objective, scientific truths, but in epistemological humility built on (per Hayek and other unacknowledged postmodernists) a recognition of the limits of human understanding and that centralization of power leads to bad results."
"That is, because we don't know objective truths," Gillespie continued, "we need to have an open exchange of ideas and innovation that allows us to gain more knowledge and understanding even if we never quite get to truth with a capital T."
Even those who believe their world views are grounded in objective truths should be sympathetic to that argument, recognizing the process by which we develop certainty in our beliefs involves the exchange of differing ideas we must compare to draw conclusions.
Not only do the proponents of political correctness censor those who express what people like me might label objective truths for instance, biological sex differences they also seek to censor anybody who expresses anything that subverts progressive orthodoxy. The result, ironically, is a shutdown of the very process by which many of them probably arrived at their own beliefs in the first place.
"We need to allow as many 'experiments in living' (to use John Stuart Mill's phrase) as possible both out of respect for others' right to choose the life they want and to gain more knowledge of what works and what doesn't," Gillespie wrote, concluding, "Political correctness is not simply an attack a given set of current beliefs, it is an attack on the process by which we become smarter and more humane. That's exactly why it's so pernicious and destructive."
There's an ascendant reflex to shout down ideas simply on the basis of their perceived wrongness. Inaccuracy, objective or subjective, is tolerated less and less in the public square.
With the obvious exception of journalists reporting on the news, it's okay for people to express ideas that are wrong, objectively or otherwise. I suspect some of this attitude stems from outrage culture on social media, where people on every point of the ideological spectrum race to belittle other worldviews. To the contrary, we need to respect the value of listening to falsehoods and bad ideas. You can't actually debunk them without knowing they exist in the first place.
Google employees should recognize that it's okay to work with a person you believe is wrong. The memo in question was explicitly respectful and appreciative of diversity. Rather than advocating for the firing of its author, why not take a deep breath, recognize the good intentions, look past your reflexive disagreement, and accept it as an opportunity to prove the correctness of your own views?
After all, one day you might just get something wrong too.
Emily Jashinsky is a commentary writer for the Washington Examiner.
See the article here:
Political correctness attacks the entire learning process - Washington Examiner
Posted in Libertarianism
Comments Off on Political correctness attacks the entire learning process – Washington Examiner
The Google Memo Exposes a Libertarian Blindspot When It Comes To Power – Reason (blog)
Posted: at 5:43 pm
HotAir.comThe "Google Memo" (read it here) raises at least two big questions from a specifically libertarian perspective: When does an employer have a right to fire an employee and how do social pressures work to shut down speech that makes powerful people uncomfortable?
The answer to the first question is pretty clear-cut, at least when talking about an at-will employee: Google (and other employers) should and do have extremely broad rights to fire any worker at any time. Exceptions rightly exist (and depending on the state one lives in, there may be fewer or more legal exceptions recognized by the courts) but they are narrow. Critics fear that at-will employment will result in chronic job instability, but no firm thrives over time by firing its workers on a regular basis and without good reasons (at-will employment also gives workers the not-insignificant ability to leave a situation without having to explain themselves or negotiate out of contractual obligations). The vast majority of Americans have never signed an employment contract (in nearly three decades of adult work, I know I never have) and are not the worse off for it.
Shortly before the memo's author was fired, Google's vice president of diversity, integrity, and governance wrote
Diversity and inclusion are a fundamental part of our values and the culture we continue to cultivate. We are unequivocal in our belief that diversity and inclusion are critical to our success as a company, and we'll continue to stand for that and be committed to it for the long haul. As Ari Balogh said in his internal G+ post, "Building an open, inclusive environment is core to who we are, and the right thing to do. 'Nuff said."
You might think that such values would have meant that James Damore, who penned the memo, might have been lauded for raising the issues he did, if not necessarily the way he did. Just earlier this year, at a shareholder meeting of Google's parent corporation Alphabet, chairman Eric Schmidt told an audience, "The company was founded under the principles of freedom of expression, diversity, inclusiveness and science-based thinking."
But whether you agree with Google's specific decision in this case, there should be no question that it has the right to fire people. If a company does that consistently for arbitrary and unconvincing reasons (ranging from enforcing ideological consistency in non-ideological organizations to erratic management to whatever), it will have huge trouble attracting and keeping talent. But in a free society, every company should have the right to put itself out fo business through bad management practices.
James Damore says that his most-recent performance review at Google rated him as "superb, which is the top few percentile" at the company. Supporters of the firing say that nobody at the company would want to work with a person who publicly questioned the announced demographic diversity goals at Google, a fact belied by reports that "over half" of Google employees don't think he should have been let go. If his firing causes more morale problems than it solves, that's Google's problem and it shouldn't erode confidence in the system of at-will employment.
The second question raised by the Google Memodubbed "an anti-diversity screed" by Gizmodo, the site that posted it in its entirety apparently without reading itis a more-complicated and interesting topic from a libertarian point of view.
Damore titled his memo "Google's Ideological Echo Chamber," and management's quick response to it underscores his titular implication, which is that political correctness has in many ways stymied any sort of good-faith conversation about issues touching on race, class, gender, and other highly charged topics. If libertarians instinctively only think about state power as worthy of critique, such a myopic perspective misses all the ways in which power asserts itself in society. As linguist Steven Pinker tweeted in response to Damore's firing, Google's hair-trigger response actually gives the supporters of President Donald Trump a juicy talking point in their war against the tyrannical ideological orthodoxy that Trump specifically said he was running against. From Pinker:
The situation is compounded by the fact that Damore's text is not in any sense the screed or rant that detractors call it. In fact, it starts with the statement, "I value diversity and inclusion, am not denying that sexism exists, and don't endorse using stereotypes" and continues
People generally have good intentions, but we all have biases which are invisible to us. Thankfully, open and honest discussion with those who disagree can highlight our blind spots and help us grow, which is why I wrote this document.
The result is a discussion of possible causes, including genetic and cultural influences, for why Google's attempt to hire more women and minorities is going so badly despite massive and ongoing efforts to change that. I suspect that the real problem with the essay's logic (as opposed to, say, Damore's personality and reputation within Google, of which I know nothing) is calling attention to the costs and effectiveness of diversity programs along with their benefits, which are simply taken for granted. Additionally, he makes a plea for ideological diversity, which never turns out well in most places that say they value "diversity":
I hope it's clear that I'm not saying that diversity is bad, that Google or society is 100% fair, that we shouldn't try to correct for existing biases, or that minorities have the same experience of those in the majority. My larger point is that we have an intolerance for ideas and evidence that don't fit a certain ideology. I'm also not saying that we should restrict people to certain gender roles; I'm advocating for quite the opposite: treat people as individuals, not as just another member of their group (tribalism).
At Quillette, a website whose editor says suffered a denial-of-service attack after publishing stories critical of Google's actions, Rutgers psychologist Lee Jussim writes:
The author of the Google essay on issues related to diversity gets nearly all of the science and its implications exactly right. Its main points are that: 1. Neither the left nor the right gets diversity completely right; 2. The social science evidence on implicit and explicit bias has been wildly oversold and is far weaker than most people seem to realize; 3. Google has, perhaps unintentionally, created an authoritarian atmosphere that has stifled discussion of these issues by stigmatizing anyone who disagrees as a bigot and instituted authoritarian policies of reverse discrimination; 4. The policies and atmosphere systematically ignore biological, cognitive, educational, and social science research on the nature and sources of individual and group differences....
This essay may not get everything 100% right, but it is certainly not a rant. And it stands in sharp contrast to most of the comments, which are little more than snarky modern slurs.
That last point is indisputable, as the more charitable negative assessments of Damore include only calling him a "shitball" and the like. And of course, the near-immediate firing of Damore, thus at least superficially proving his large point that Google's commitment to "freedom of expression, diversity, inclusiveness and science-based thinking" is a joke.
Even self-described Marxists such as Princeton philosopher Peter Singer have criticized Google for its actions:
On an issue that matters, Damore put forward a view that has reasonable scientific support, and on which it is important to know what the facts are. Why then was he fired?
Again, from a libertarian point of view, one traditional response to Singer's question would be: Who cares, it's none of our business what a private entity does because libertarianism is ultimately about relations between individuals and the state, not individuals and voluntary associations they make, including employment.
The Google Memo controversy reveals the limitations of such narrow or "thin" libertarianism. Political correctnesswhich is both the enforcement of an orthodox set of beliefs and the legitimization of any criticism of those beliefsis an attitude that is hardly limited only to state capitols, state agencies, and state universities. It exists everywhere in our lives and should be battled wherever we encounter it since it undermines free-thinking and free expression, the very hallmarks of a libertarian society. We have not just a right to criticize the actions of private actors but arguably a responsibility to do so, even if there is no public policy change being called for (Google should be allowed to fire whomever it wants, though its grounds for doing so are fair game for public discussion). Libertarianism is ultimately grounded not in anything like knowable, objective, scientific truths, but in epistemological humility built on (per Hayek and other unacknowledged postmodernists) a recognition of the limits of human understanding and that centralization of power leads to bad results. That is, because we don't know objective truths, we need to have an open exchange of ideas and innovation that allows us to gain more knowledge and understanding even if we never quite get to truth with a capital T. At the same time, we need to allow as many "experiments in living" (to use John Stuart Mill's phrase) as possible both out of respect for others' right to choose the life they want and to gain more knowledge of what works and what doesn't. Political correctness is not simply an attack a given set of current beliefs, it is an attack on the process by which we become smarter and more humane. That's exactly why it's so pernicious and destructive.
With that in mind, here's Penn Jillette in 2011 talking about why he's a libertarian. It's a provocative and persuasive argument, I think:
See more here:
The Google Memo Exposes a Libertarian Blindspot When It Comes To Power - Reason (blog)
Posted in Libertarianism
Comments Off on The Google Memo Exposes a Libertarian Blindspot When It Comes To Power – Reason (blog)
Immortality: Silicon Valley’s latest obsession ushers in the transhumanist era – South China Morning Post
Posted: at 5:42 pm
Zoltan Istvan is launching his campaign to become Libertarian governor of the American state of California with two signature policies. First, hell eliminate poverty with a universal basic income that will guarantee US$5,000 per month for every Californian household for ever. (Hell do this without raising taxes, he promises.)
The next item in his in-tray is eliminating death. He intends to divert trillions of dollars into life-extending technologies robotic hearts, artificial exoskeletons, genetic editing, bionic limbs and so on in the hope that each Californian man, woman and AI (artificial intelligence) will eventually be able to upload their consciousness to the Cloud and experience digital eternity.
What we can experience as a human being is going to be dramatically different within two decades, Istvan says, when we meet at his home in Mill Valley, California. We have five senses now. We might have thousands in 30 or 40 years. We might have very different bodies, too.
I have friends who are about a year away from cutting off their arm and replacing it with a prosthetic version. And sure, pretty soon the robotic arm really will be better than a biological one. Lets say you work in construction and your buddy can lift a thousand times what you can. The question is: do you get it?
For most people, the answer to this question is likely to be, Erm, maybe Ill pass for the moment. But to a transhumanist such as Istvan, 44, the answer is, Hell, yes! A former National Geographic reporter and property speculator, Istvan combines the enthusiasm of a child whos read a lot of Marvel comics with a parodically presidential demeanour. Hes a blond-haired, blue-eyed father of two with an athletic build, a firm handshake and the sort of charisma that goes down well in TED talks.
Like most transhumanists (there are a lot of them in California), Istvan believes our species can, and indeed should, strive to transcend our biological limitations. And he has taken it upon himself to push this idea out of the Google Docs of a few Silicon Valley dreamers and into the American political mainstream.
Twenty-five years ago, hardly anybody was recycling, he explains. Now, environmentalism has conditioned an entire generation. Im trying to put transhumanism on a similar trajectory, so that in 10, 15 years, everybody is going to know what it means and think about it in a very positive way.
What were saying is that over the next 30 years, the complexity of human experience is going to become so amazing, you ought to at least see it
Zoltan Istvan
I meet Istvan at the home he shares with his wife, Lisa an obstetrician and gynaecologist with Planned Parenthood and their two daughters, six-year-old Eva, and Isla, who is three. I had been expecting a gadget-laden cyber-home; in fact, he resides in a 100-year-old loggers house built from Californian redwood, with a converted stable on the ground floor and plastic childrens toys in the yard. If it werent for the hyper-inflated prices in the Bay Area (Its sort of Facebook yuppie-ville around here, says Istvan) youd say it was a humble Californian homestead.
Still, there are a few details that give him away, such as the forbidding security warnings on his picket fence. During his unsuccessful bid for the presidency last year he stood as the Transhumanist Party candidate and scored zero per cent a section of the religious right identified him as the Antichrist. This, combined with Lisas work providing abortions, means they get a couple of death threats a week and have had to report to the FBI.
Christians in America have made transhumanism as popular as its become, says Istvan. They really need something that they can point their finger at that fulfils Revelations.
Istvan also has a West Wing box set on his mantelpiece and a small Meccano cyborg by the fireplace. Its named Jethro, after the protagonist of his self-published novel, The Transhumanist Wager (2013). And there is an old Samsung phone attached to the front door, which enables him to unlock the house using the microchip in his finger.
A lot of the Christians consider my chip a mark of the beast, he says. Im like, No! Its so I dont have to carry my keys when I go out jogging.
Istvan hopes to chip his daughters before long for security purposes and recently argued with his wife about whether it was even worth saving for a university fund for them, since by the time they reach university age, advances in artificial intelligence will mean they can just upload all the learning they need. Lisa won that argument. But hes inclined not to freeze his sperm and Lisas eggs, since if they decide to have a third child, 10 or 20 or 30 years hence, theyll be able to combine their DNA.
Even if theres a mischievous, fake-it-till-you-make-it quality to Istvan, theres also a core of seriousness. He is genuinely troubled that we are on the verge of a technological dystopia that the mass inequalities that helped fuel US President Donald Trumps rise will only worsen when the digital revolution really gets under way. And he despairs of the retrogressive bent of the current administration: Trump talks all the time about immigrants taking jobs. Bulls**t. Its technology thats taking jobs. We have about four million truck drivers who are about to lose their jobs to automation. This is why capitalism needs a basic income to survive.
And hes not wrong in identifying that emerging technologies such as AI and bio-enhancement will bring with them policy implications, and its probably a good idea to start talking about them now.
Stephen Hawkings question to China: will AI help or destroy the human race?
Certainly, life extension is a hot investment in Silicon Valley, whose elites have a hard time with the idea that their billions will not protect them from an earthly death. Google was an early investor in the secretive biotech start-up Calico, the California Life Company, which aims to devise interventions that slow ageing and counteract age-related diseases. Billionaire venture capitalist Peter Thiel has invested millions in parabiosis: the process of curing ageing with transfusions of young peoples blood.
Another biotech firm, United Therapeutics, has unveiled plans to grow fresh organs from DNA. Clearly, it is possible, through technology, to make death optional, the firms founder, Martine Rothblatt, told a recent gathering of the National Academy of Medicine in Los Angeles.
In attendance were Google co-founder Sergey Brin, vegan pop star Moby and numerous venture capitalists. Istvan fears that unless we develop policies to regulate this transition, the Thiels of this world will soon be hoarding all the young blood for themselves.
Clearly, it is possible, through technology, to make death optional
Martine Rothblatt
Istvan was born in Oregon in 1973, the son of Hungarian immigrants who fled Stalins tanks in 1968. He had a comfortable middle-class upbringing his mother was a devout Catholic and sent him to Catholic school and an eye for a story. After graduating from Columbia University, he embarked on a solo round-the-world yachting expedition, during which, he says, he read 500 works of classic literature. He spent his early career reporting for the National Geographic channel from more than 100 countries, many of them conflict zones, claiming to have invented the extreme sport of volcano boarding along the way.
One of the things he shares in common with Americas current president is a fortune accrued from real estate. While he was making films overseas in the noughties, his expenses were minimal, so he was able to invest all of his pay cheques in property.
AlphaGos China showdown: Why its time to embrace artificial intelligence
So many people in America were doing this flipping thing at the time, explains Istvan. I realised very quickly, Wow! I could make enough money to retire. It was just quite easy and lucrative to do that.
At his peak, he had a portfolio of 19 fixer-upper houses, most of which he managed to sell before the crash of 2008. He now retains nine as holiday rentals and uses the proceeds to fund his political campaigns (he is reluctant to name his other backers). Still, he insists hes not part of the 1 per cent; the most extravagant item of furniture is a piano, and his groceries are much the same as you find in many liberal, middle-class Californian households.
Istvan cant think of any particular incident that prompted his interest in eternal life, other than perhaps a rejection of Catholicism.
Fifty per cent of me thinks after we die we get eaten by worms, and our body matter and brain return unconsciously to the cosmos [] The other half subscribes to the idea that we live in a holographic universe where other alien artificial intelligences have reached the singularity, he says, referring to the idea, advanced by Google engineer Ray Kurzweil, that pretty soon we will all merge with AI in one transcendental consciousness.
However, when Istvan first encountered transhumanism, at university via an article on cryonics (the practice of deep-freezing the recently dead in the hope that they can be revived at some point), he was sold. Within 90 seconds, I realised thats what I wanted to do in my life.
After a near-death experience in Vietnam he came close to stepping on a landmine Istvan decided to return to America and make good on this vow. I was nearing 30 and Id done some great work, but after all that time Id spent in conflict zones, seeing dead bodies, stuff like that, I thought it would be a good time to dedicate myself to conquering death.
He spent four years writing his novel, which he proudly claims was rejected by more than 600 agents and publishers. Its a dystopian story that imagines a Christian nation outlawing transhumanism, prompting all the billionaires to retreat to an offshore sea-stead where they can work on their advances undisturbed (Thiel has often threatened to do something similar).
Istvan continued to promote transhumanism by writing free columns for Huffington Post and Vice, chosen because they have strong Alexa rankings (ie, they show up high in Google search results).
I wrote something like 200 articles, putting transhumanism through the Google algorithm again and again, he says. I found it a very effective way to spread the message. I covered every angle that I could think of: disability and transhumanism; LGBT issues and transhumanism; transhumanist parenting.
Hes proud to say hes the only mainstream journalist who is so devoted to the cause. A lot of people write about transhumanism, but I think Im the only one who says, This is the best thing thats ever happened!
Why your biological age may hold the key to reversing the ageing process
Istvans presidential campaign was an attempt to take all of this up a level. It sounds as if he had a lot of fun. He toured Rust Belt car parks and Deep South mega-churches in a coffin-shaped immortality bus inspired by the one driven by Ken Kesey and his Merry Pranksters to promote LSD in the 1960s.
His platform Make America Immortal Again earned a fair amount of publicity, but Americans seemed ill-prepared for such concepts as the AI imperative (the idea that the first nation to create a true AI will basically win everything, so America had better be the first) and the singularity. At one point, he and his supporters were held at gunpoint by some Christians in Alabama.
The experience taught him a salutary lesson: unless you are a billionaire, it is simply impossible to make any kind of dent in the system. Hence his defection to the Libertarian Party, which vies with the Greens as the third party in American politics. Every town I go to, theres a Libertarian meet-up. With the Transhumanists, Id have to create the meet-up. So theres more to work with.
The Libertarian presidential candidate, Gary Johnson, received 3.27 per cent of the votes last year, including half a million votes in California. About seven or eight million are likely to vote in the California governor race, in which context, half a million starts to become a lot of votes, Istvan explains.
His own politics are somewhere between Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders, he admits, and he has a hard time converting the right wing of his new party to causes such as basic income. (The general spirit of libertarian America is, Hands off!) But he believes transhumanism shares enough in common with libertarianism for the alliance to be viable; the core precepts of being able to do what you like as long as you dont harm anyone else are the same. And the gubernatorial campaign serves as a primary for the 2020 presidential election, when he believes the Libertarian candidate will have a feasible chance of participating in the television debates.
But whats wrong with death? Dont we need old people to die to make space for new people? And by extension, we need old ideas and old regimes to die, too. Imagine if William Randolph Hearst or Genghis Khan were still calling the shots now. And imagine if Mark Zuckerberg and Vladimir Putin were doing so in 200 years. Innovation would cease, the species would atrophy, everyone would get terribly bored. Isnt it the ultimate narcissism to want to live forever?
Istvan does concede that transhumanism is a very selfish philosophy. However, he has an answer for most of the other stuff.
Im a believer in overpopulation Ive been to Delhi and its overcrowded, he says. But if we did a better job of governing, the planet could hold 15 billion people comfortably. Its really a question of better rules and regulations.
And when discussing the desirability of eternal life, he turns into a sort of holiday rep for the future.
What were saying is that over the next 30 years, the complexity of human experience is going to become so amazing, you ought to at least see it, Istvan says. A lot of people find that a lot more compelling than, say, dying of leukaemia.
Still, it comes as little surprise that hes finding live for ever an easier sell than give money to poor people in 21st-century America.
I cant imagine basic income not becoming a platform in the 2020 election, he insists. And if not then, at some point, someone is going to run and win on it. The Republicans should like it because it streamlines government. The Democrats should like it because it helps poor people. Right now, Americans dont like it because it sounds like socialism. But it just needs a little reframing.
Basic-income experiments are already under way in parts of Canada, Finland and the Netherlands, but how would he fund such an idea in the US? He cant raise taxes libertarians hate that. And he doesnt want to alienate Silicon Valley.
If we did a better job of governing, the planet could hold 15 billion people comfortably
Zoltan Istvan
How do you tell the 1 per cent youre going to take all this money from them? It wouldnt work, he says. They control too many things. But Istvan has calculated that 45 per cent of California is government-controlled land that the state could monetise.
A lot of environmentalists are upset at me for that, saying, Woah, Zolt, you want to put a shopping mall in Yosemite? Well, the reality is that the poor people in America will never be able to afford to go to Yosemite. Im trying to be a diplomat here.
And he insists that if Americans miss those national parks when theyve been turned into luxury condos and Taco Bells, theyll be able to replenish them some day if they want.
Theres nanotechnology coming through that would enable us to do that, Istvan argues. We have GMOs [genetically modified organisms] that can regrow plants twice as quick. In 50 or 100 years, were not even going to be worried about natural resources.
Such is his wager that exponential technological growth is around the corner and we may as well hurry it along, because its our best chance of clearing up the mess weve made of things thus far.
The safety of genetically-modified crops is backed by science
Didnt the political developments of 2016 persuade him that progress can be slow and sometimes go backwards? Actually, Istvan argues that what were witnessing are the death throes of conservatism, Christianity, even capitalism.
Everyone says the current pope is the best one weve had for ages, that hes so progressive and whatever. Actually, Catholicism is dying, says Istvan. Nobodys giving it any money any more, so the pope had better moderate its message. As for capitalism, all of this nationalism and populism are just the dying moments.
Its a system that goes against the very core of humanitarian urges. And while its brought us many wonderful material gains, at some point we can say, Thats enough. In the transhumanist age, we will reach utopia. Crime drops to zero. Poverty will end. Violence will drop. At some point, we become a race of individuals who are pretty nice to each other.
But now weve talked for so long that Istvan needs to go and pick up his daughters from childcare. He insists that I join him. What do his family make of all of this?
My wife is a bit sceptical of a lot of my timelines, he says. Lisa comes from practical Wisconsin farming stock, and its a fair bet that her work with Planned Parenthood keeps her pretty grounded. They met on dating website match.com. Does she believe in all this stuff?
I dont want to say shes not a transhumanist, he says, but I dont think shed cryogenically freeze herself tomorrow. I would. Im like, If you see me dying of a heart attack, please put me in a refrigerator. She thinks thats weird.
We arrive at the community centre where Istvans daughters are being looked after. They come running out in summer dresses, sweet and sunny and happy to be alive. Both of them want to be doctors when they grow up, like their mum.
The Times/The Interview People
Read more here:
Immortality: Silicon Valley's latest obsession ushers in the transhumanist era - South China Morning Post
Posted in Transhumanist
Comments Off on Immortality: Silicon Valley’s latest obsession ushers in the transhumanist era – South China Morning Post
NEWMAN: A chip in the hand isn’t worth much – Scottsbluff Star Herald
Posted: at 5:42 pm
Will you be chipped one day? Will you be forced, or strongly encouraged or incentivized, to have a microchip under your skin to make payment, identification and no doubt tracking all that much easier?
Three Square Market, a Wisconsin-based firm specializing in vending machines, recently offered its employees a chance to say goodbye to hard-to-remember log-in codes and the need for ID badges. Employees could sign up to have a dime-sized microchip implanted in their hands. Surprisingly, 50-some employees allowed a tattoo artist to insert the chips. The company hopes to generate enough buzz to sell consumers on one day opting for a wave of their chipped hands in front of its vending machines, instead of pulling out a credit card or using their smart phones.
Technology appears to be charting its course to land within us. This trajectory, I suppose, stands to reason. Tech continues to grow smarter and smaller.
I just want to say one word to you, one word plastics. Thats the advice the know-it-all businessman offers the title character of the 1967 classic The Graduate. Today I have one word for you: miniaturization.
From swarms of mosquito-sized killer drones to phones/augmented-reality tech/passports inside of us, mini could be the word that defines the future. Already in Sweden, according to USA Today, some 3,000 folks have microchips implanted that allow them to board the train with a swipe of their hands.
If you want to be chipped right now, you just need to go to Dangerous Things, a Seattle-based outfit. The company is big on transhumanism: the notion that through genetic and technological enhancement people will soon transcend what it means to be human. We will genetically engineer away disease. We will amp abilities and extend lifetimes to near immortality. We will be posthuman, even (in the words of some transhumanist theorists) homo deus. Ye will be as gods, I remember someone saying once.
There are some things, the company says on its web site (dangerousthings.com), we will likely never achieve through gene modification. The ability to store digital data in our bodies. The ability to compute data and perform cryptography in our bodies. The ability to transmit and receive digital data and talk directly to machines in their digital language.
The interconnected world of the Internet, in other words, will come to us to the point that we will become our phones and laptops. Truly we will live and move and have our being in the Web. We will swim within its currents.
Or drown.
Our bodies are our own, to do what we want with, the company continues on its web site, sounding the clarion call for bio-hacking. Sound familiar? That is the ideological tidal stream one of radical personal autonomy carrying us deeper into the 21st century and what may well be the abyss. This amounts (it is said smugly) to the right side of history. People are what they say they are and what they want to be, and will do what they want with themselves. And if anyone challenges these assertions, she is a bigot. And of course, Nazis were bigots; therefore, anyone who stands in the path of the declared right side of history is a Nazi. And you know what you do with Nazis, dont you?
The company invokes a familiar incantation to ward away any criticism: The socially acceptable of tomorrow is formed by boundaries pushed today, and were excited to be part of it. History, in this paradigm, advances by the knocking down of boundaries. What is socially acceptable in one time becomes regressive in the next, thanks to boundary-pushing radicals like Dangerous Things, and so the dialectical dance makes its way one transgression after another until we reach a utopia where money and sex and identity are as fluid and free as the waters of the ocean.
If this isnt the hijacking of Christian eschatology, that is, how the world will play itself until the end of times, and jury-rigged to disordered human desire bent on casting aside all restraints and becoming as gods onto themselves, Im not sure what it is. I do know it takes a society as wealthy as it is decadent to think history works that way, that progress is engendered by smashing one boundary after another and that, in this chaos, everything will come out swimmingly well.
Boundaries, like the guardrails on a road, can be there for a reason. The ones on roads can be replaced if they are knocked down. Its not so easy with the ones that maintain civilization.
For the ancient Greeks, those who, in their arrogance, confused themselves with the gods garnered the attention of Nemesis. Nemesis in Greek means to give what is due, for she is the agent of inescapable vengeance. By her hand many a civilization has been crippled, dispatched to the graveyard even. In our hubris, in our dreams of self-proclaimed godhood, I dont think a microchip in the hand will be much match for the sword Nemesis carries in hers.
Introductory Offer
Get All Access for only $11 per month. That's print, e-edition and website for only $132 a year!
Want just Digital Access? Get it today for only 99 cents a week!
Call 308-632-9010 or email circ@starherald.com to get started.
Read more from the original source:
NEWMAN: A chip in the hand isn't worth much - Scottsbluff Star Herald
Posted in Transhumanist
Comments Off on NEWMAN: A chip in the hand isn’t worth much – Scottsbluff Star Herald
It’s not just Venezuela. Elected governments don’t necessarily defend democracy or protect human rights. – Washington Post
Posted: at 5:41 pm
By Christopher Sabatini and Jimena Galindo By Christopher Sabatini and Jimena Galindo August 11 at 12:00 PM
On Aug. 8, 12 countries in Latin America raised their voices to oppose Venezuelan President Nicols Maduros move from democracy to autocracy. In a meeting convened in Lima, Peru, foreign ministers from Argentina, Brazil, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico, Panama, Paraguay and Peru publicly denounced the Maduro governments constituent assembly, convened to rewrite the countrys 17-year-old constitution, and declared that they would not recognize any laws or contracts approved by the assembly that should be the responsibility of the democratically elected national legislature.
[Venezuelas instability has far broader implications. Heres whats at stake.]
The 12 nations efforts came after more than a decade during which Hugo Chvez (Venezuelas president from 1999 to 2013) and his successor, Maduro (2013 to present),undercut democratic institutions, cracked down on human rights, and brought to the country economic, social and political chaos.
Why were they silent so long?Theory and rhetoric have led many to believe that elected governments are more prone to support human rights and democracy. As recently as 2001, 34 of the Western Hemispheres 35 states had signed the charter of the Organization of American States, publicly committing themselves to promoting democracy. But that commitment has not always been in evidence.
[This explains why Venezuelans reelect leaders who dismantle democracy]
At Global Americans, weve recently researched the intersection of elected governments and Latin American foreign policy and found that elections do not necessarily result in respect for human rights. In some cases, the hemispheres elected governments have actually worked to undermine the international norms and institutions that defend human rights and democracy.
Heres how we did our research
We examined the voting records of Latin American governments in the U.N. Human Rights Council (UNHRC), their activities in the regional Inter-American System of Human Rights and the Organization of American States (OAS), and their commitment to international standards for free and fair elections from 2011 to May 2017.
We found that a subset of countries with elected governments across the region tend to vote more withnondemocratic or semi-authoritarian countriessuch as Russia, China and Turkey, and often failed to speak out forcefully in multilateral bodies over human rights abuses.
Of the 47 total members in the UNHRC, eight seats are reserved for Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC). Since 2016, the members from Latin America and the Caribbean have been Bolivia, Brazil, Cuba, Ecuador, El Salvador, Panama, Paraguay and Venezuela.
[Venezuelas government wants to write a new constitution. That way lies autocracy.]
So how have these elected governments voted on human rights questions?
When voting on resolutions or other actions related to questions in Syria, North Korea and Ukraine, half those countries Brazil, El Salvador, Panama and Paraguay often voted to enable the United Nations to defend human rights. However, the other half Bolivia, Cuba, Ecuador and Venezuela voted with Russia, China and Turkey to protect government sovereignty and deny outsiders like the U.N. the ability to interfere with the domestic affairs of countries.
Of course, Cuba and Venezuela are not true democracies. But Bolivia and Ecuador both have elected governments. And Brazil, when governed by Luiz Incio Lula da Silva and then Dilma Rousseff of the Workers Party, abstained on human rights resolutions on North Korea (once) and Ukraine (twice). Similarly, Argentina, under the Peronist government of President Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner, abstained from the second Ukraine human rights resolution. Cuba, Venezuela and Bolivia have never voted in favor of a resolution on Syria. And Ecuador has also voted against resolutions three times and abstained 11 times, although it has twice voted in favor reprimanding Syrian human rights violations.
We found similar patterns in regional multilateral bodies like the OAS and its Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR). In the past year, the OAS has twice attempted to pass a resolution expressing concern over the deterioration of human rights and democracy in Venezuela.
Each time, the organization failed to get the necessary two-thirds vote. Opposed were an ideological coalition of pro-Venezuela governments, grouped as Alianza Bolivariana para los Pueblos de Nuestra Amrica (ALBA) that includes Bolivia, Ecuador and Nicaragua, as well as a bloc of PetroCaribe countries (including the Dominican Republic and the Bahamas) that benefit from subsidized Venezuelan oil.
In the most recent vote at the OAS General Assembly in June this year, Mexico and Argentina sponsored a resolution condemning the Venezuelan governments plan to rewrite the constitution a controversial move widely considered anti-democratic. The elected governments of Nicaragua, Dominica, Bolivia, and Saint Vincent and the Grenadines voted against the resolution. And the Dominican Republic, another elected government, abstained.
[Dont be duped or misled about the Venezuela protests. These 5 insights will help.]
Why do these elected governments hold back from condemning violations of human rights and democratic norms?
Many of these governments profess ideological sympathy with the Chavez/Maduro governments leftward leanings, especially among the ALBA countries.
But others resist both popular sovereignty as well as international norms to defend human rights. The Dominican Republics government, for instance, has itself been condemned for violating human rights, particularly stripping the citizenship of and deporting Dominican citizens of Haitian descent. Faced with international criticism of that effort, in 2014 the Dominican Republics Constitutional Court removed it from the jurisdiction of the Inter-American System of Human Rights.
The Western Hemisphere includes many elected governments that have emerged from being ruled by brutal military juntas but they have not necessarily stood up for democratic values for their neighbors. The Lima declaration shows that positions do shift. Some of the countries that finally condemned Venezuela have traditionally stood up for human rights, including Costa Rica and Chile. Some that signed on did so after a change in administration, as in Argentina and Brazil.
But most of the 32 elected governments have nevertheless failed to unify on behalf of democratic values. Being elected, apparently, does not necessarily translate into standing firmly for democracy.
Christopher Sabatini is a lecturer at Columbia Universitys School of International and Public Affairs and executive director of Global Americans.
Jimena Galindo is a research associate at Global Americans.
See the article here:
It's not just Venezuela. Elected governments don't necessarily defend democracy or protect human rights. - Washington Post
Posted in Post Human
Comments Off on It’s not just Venezuela. Elected governments don’t necessarily defend democracy or protect human rights. – Washington Post
The Climate Post: Federal Science Report Finds Human Activity Does Influence Climate Change – HuffPost
Posted: at 5:41 pm
Adraft reporton the science of climate change estimates that it is extremely likely that more than half of the rise in temperatures over the past four decades hasbeen causedby human activity. This activity, it estimates,is responsiblean increase in global temperatures of 1.1 to 1.3 degrees Fahrenheit from 1951 to 2010.
Many lines of evidence demonstrate that human activities, especially emissions of greenhouse [heat trapping] gases, are primarily responsible for the observed climate changes, notes the Climate Science Special Report, which wasavailable on requestduring a public comment periodearlier this yearbut which received little attention until it was reported on byThe New York Timesthis week. There are no alternative explanations, and no natural cycles are found in the observational record that can explain the observed changes in climate, said the report.
Penned by scientists at13 federal agenciesthis year, the draft report is a special science section of The National Climate Assessment, which is congressionally mandated every four years. The National Academy of Sciences has signed off on the draft report, and it now awaits permission from the Trump administration to officially release the document.
Thedraft report suggeststhat even if humans immediately stopped emitting greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, the world would warm at least an additional 0.50 degrees Fahrenheit (0.30 degrees Celsius) over this century compared with today. More greenhouse emissions will lead to higher temperatures.
The draft study follows reports byThe Hillthat staffers at a U.S. Department of Agriculture were told earlier this year toavoid the termclimate change in communications and to use phrases like weather extremes instead.
We wont change the modeling, just how we talk about it, Bianca Moebius-Clune, the Natural Resources Conservation Services director of soil health,wrote in an e-mailto staff.
On Tuesday, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administrationreportedthat the United States experienced its second warmest year to date and 10th warmest July on record.
Court Extends Delay on Clean Power Plan; Vacates HFC Rule
In a 21decision, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit found Tuesday that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)does not have the authorityto enact an Obama-era rule ending the use of hydroflurocarbons (HFCs). The2015 EPA rulebanned 38 individual HFCs or HFC blends in four industrial sectorsaerosols, air conditioning for new cars, retail food refrigeration and foam blowingunder the Significant New Alternatives Policy (SNAP) program (subscription).
A lawsuitMexichem Fluor, Inc. v. EPAchallenged EPAs use of SNAP, saying that HFCs do not deplete the ozone. On Tuesday, the court found thatbecause HFCsare not ozone-depleting substances, the EPA could not use section 612 of the Clean Air Act to ban them.
However much we might sympathize or agree with EPAs policy objectives, EPA may act only within the boundaries of its statutory authority. Here, EPA exceeded that authority, Judge Brett Kavanaughwrote for the court. Indeed, before 2015, EPA itself maintained that Section 612 did not grant authority to require replacement of non-ozone-depleting substances such as HFCs. EPAs novel reading of Section 612 is inconsistent with the statute as written. Section 612 does not require (or give EPA authority to require) manufacturers to replace non-ozone depleting substances such as HFCs.
Also on Tuesday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuitinstituteda new 60-day abeyance of the long-running legal battle over the EPAs Clean Power Plan, which would require reductions of carbon dioxide emissions from the power sector. The court order, which also directs the EPA to file status reports every 30 days, reminds the Trump administration of the2009 endangerment finding, which means the EPA has an affirmative statutory obligation to regulate greenhouse gases.
In late April, the court grantedan initial delayof the litigation as the White House considers how to replace it.
United States Formally Announces Intention to Withdraw from the Paris Agreement
Last week U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson told U.S. diplomats tosidestep questionsabout conditions for the Trump administration to re-engage in the Paris Agreement, according to a diplomatic cable published yesterday byReuters. But the communication leaves no doubt about President Trumps intentions: there areno plans to seek to re-negotiateor amend the text of the Paris Agreement. Moreover, the August 4 cable instructs diplomats to let other countries know that the United States wants to help them use fossil fuels.
The cable was sent on the day that the United States formally announced itsintention to withdrawfrom the Paris Agreement but said that it willcontinue to participatein international climate change negotiations during thethree-year withdrawal process. The earliest date for the United States to completely withdraw from the agreement isNovember 4, 2020.
President Donald Trump is open to re-engaging in the Paris Agreement if the United States can identify terms that are more favorable to it, its businesses, its workers, its people, and its taxpayers,said the State Department memo, which noted the U.S. role in future climate talks.
The United States will continue to participate in international climate change negotiations and meetings . . . to protect U.S. interests and ensure all future policy options remain open to the administration, the State Department said. Such participation will include ongoing negotiations related to guidance for implementing the Paris Agreement.
A United Nations statement acknowledging receipt of the notice from the United States reiterated Secretary-General Antnio Guterres disappointment in the decision.
It is crucial that the United States remains a leader on climate and sustainable development. Climate change is impacting now,said Guterres spokesman Stphane Dujarric.
Signatories to the Paris Agreement vowed to keep the worldwide rise in temperatureswell below two degrees Celsius(3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) from pre-industrial times and to pursue efforts to hold the increase under 1.5 degrees Celsius. The U.S. pledge, under former President Barack Obama, was a cut in U.S. greenhouse gas emissions of as much as28 percentfrom 2005 levels by 2025.
Prior to release of the climate policy guidance cable, the Trump administrations reiteration of plans to depart from the Paris climate deal hadraised questionsabout what re-engaging in the deal meant and how U.S. participation in climate talks could play out (subscription). With regard to negotiations, the Trump administration could adopt an obstructionist role by pushing for measures to enable reduction of emissions-cut ambitions. Or it could play a constructivist role by advancing rules for transparency (the United States and China co-chair the working group writing those rules). Other areas in which the Trump administration could exert its influence include emissions reporting requirements, monitoring land-use change and developing market mechanisms.
The Climate Postoffers a rundown of the week in climate and energy news. It is produced each Thursday byDuke Universitys Nicholas Institute for Environmental Policy Solutions.
The Morning Email
Wake up to the day's most important news.
Originally posted here:
The Climate Post: Federal Science Report Finds Human Activity Does Influence Climate Change - HuffPost
Posted in Post Human
Comments Off on The Climate Post: Federal Science Report Finds Human Activity Does Influence Climate Change – HuffPost
Scientists Hit Breakthrough In Quest To Transplant Pig Organs Into Humans – HuffPost
Posted: at 5:41 pm
A team of researchers in Cambridge, Massachusetts, have hit a breakthrough in their quest to develop pigs whose organs and other tissues can be transplanted into humans.
The team, led by a biotechnology company called eGenesis, announced Thursday that it has successfully used a powerful gene-editing technique known as CRISPR to modify the DNA in pig cells and remove a number of viruses that make pig organs unsuitable for human transplant. (Read more here on how CRISPR works and its potential for humans.)
Those virus-free cells were then used to fertilize several pig embryos, which were implanted in sows who have since given birth to virus-free pigs.
eGenesis
Its a huge step, as those viruses (more specifically known as porcine endogenous retroviruses, or PERVs) pose a not-yet-fully-understood but potentially significant health threat to humans.
In a clinical trial in Europe, for example, researchers genetically modified a similar retrovirus from mice to help treat severe immunodeficiency in children. Most of the children benefited from the treatment, notes the Food and Drug Administration, but some developed leukemia.
In other words, we dont need to know the exact effects of the viruses to know we dont want them around.
Creating PERV-free pigs is the first step in a four-step process to ultimately create pig organs suitable for human transplant or xenotransplantation, Dr. Luhan Yang, a co-founder of eGenesis and the companys chief science officer, explained to HuffPost.
(Doctors have long used pig and cow valves to replace their leaky equivalents in the human heart, but kidneys and more complex organs represent a much bigger achievement.)
Next, the company needs to make sure it can consistently replicate virus-free pigs, which its already well on its way to doing.
After that, Yang explained, it will need to test how the human immune system responds to the organs and modify them so they arent rejected, creating what she referred to as pig 2.0, featuring advanced immune compatibility.
eGenesis
Step four will be developing the infrastructure to produce and deliver lifesaving organs worldwide.
Yang didnt want to speculate on a precise timeline for when xenotransplantation might be a common procedure, but the company is making very real, tangible progress toward that goal.
Other promising technologies in development include 3D-printing organs and growing them in a petri dish.
In the United States alone, almost 117,000 people are currently awaiting a lifesaving organ transplant, according to the United Network for Organ Sharing.About 60 percent of transplant operations since 1988 have been for a kidney(which has anaverage wait time of five years), 22 percent a liver (wait time: 11 months), 10 percent a heart (four months), and 5 percent a lung (four months).
Originally posted here:
Scientists Hit Breakthrough In Quest To Transplant Pig Organs Into Humans - HuffPost
Posted in Post Human
Comments Off on Scientists Hit Breakthrough In Quest To Transplant Pig Organs Into Humans – HuffPost
Making A Better Brain: Scientists Just Discovered a New Kind of Brain Cell – Futurism
Posted: at 5:40 pm
In BriefResearchers from the Salk Institute and the University ofCalifornia San Diego have discovered a way to categorize neuronsdown to the molecular level. This will help scientists to compose a"parts list" of the brain and, perhaps, create interfaces thatimprove its functionality. New Neurons
Mapping exactly how the human brain functions is, perhaps, the most promising step when it comes to transforming how humans operate on a fundamental level. Mapping how the brain works down to the molecular level could help us find new ways to combat neurological and even allow us to enhance human intelligence. Already, a host of innovators are working to develop technology that intertwines with the brain to enhance its functionality; however, before we can deploy such technologies, we need tofully understand how the brain works.
And we just got a little bit closer. Today, a team of researchers from the Salk Institute and the University of California San Diego announced that they havemade a major discovery that could aid usin this effort. Through a relatively new process, the scientists were able to discover new types of brain cells.
According to the co-senior author, Joseph Ecker, professor and director of Salks Genomic Analysis Laboratory and an investigator of the Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Decades ago, neuronswere identified by their shape. Now we are taking a molecularapproach by looking at this modification of the methylation profile between cells and that tells us what type of cell it is pretty accurately.
In short, sequencing the molecular structure of neurons that look the same under a microscope, we can begin to sort them into subgroups to give a better understanding of each subgroups functionality. We think its pretty striking that we can tease apart a brain into individual cells, sequence their methylomes, and identify many new cell types along with their gene regulatory elements, the genetic switches that make these neurons distinct from each other, Ecker notes.
This research will allow scientists to get a complete parts list of each neuron and its function. According to Chonguan Luo, a Salk research associate, and co-first author of the research paper, such mapping will open a host of new doors: There are hundreds, if not thousands, of types of brain cells that have different functions and behaviors and its important to know what all these types are to understand how the brain works.
As previously mentioned, these findings could have a profound impact on how we study and treat neurological disorders. Eckers next move is to research molecular differences in the brains of healthy subjects versus those with brain disease. If theres a defect in just one percent of cells, we should be able to see it with this method, he says. Until now, we would have had no chance of picking something up in that small a percentage of cells.
Researchers will be able to pin point the exact cell types that may be responsible for a particular disease. With that knowledge, future research would be able to focus on correcting that abnormality. we can develop, from this information, new tools to be able to study particular cell populations once we know they exist, says Ecker.
Understanding the brain on this minute of a level will certainly open up a wide range of possibility for the future of treating disease, as well as preparing us for a new level of bionic integration.
Go here to see the original:
Making A Better Brain: Scientists Just Discovered a New Kind of Brain Cell - Futurism
Posted in Futurism
Comments Off on Making A Better Brain: Scientists Just Discovered a New Kind of Brain Cell – Futurism
Google’s Parent Company Will Soon Compete With Tesla for Energy Storage Solutions – Futurism
Posted: at 5:40 pm
In BriefMalta, a project at Alphabet's "moonshot" factory, hasdeveloped a system that stores renewable energy in molten saltinstead of batteries. The project is now looking for partners totest the commercial viability of their system, which could helpclear one of the major hurdles to widespread clean energy adoption. Maximizing Renewables
Given the dramatic impact human-made carbon emissions are having on our planet, cleaner energy sources have become increasingly popular alternativesto their fossil fuel counterparts. Currently, solar and wind are the most widely used renewable energy sources, but both are dependent on certain conditions. The former can capture energy only during daylight hours, while the latter is more unpredictable,but often peaks at night.
As such, theres a mismatch between when solar and wind energy are available and when energy is needed. The world needs a way to maximize renewable energy usage, and thats whatMalta, a project currently brewing at Alphabet X, the moonshot factory by Googles parent company, is hoping to provide.
The goal of Alphabet X is to develop technologies that could someday make the world a radically better place. The organization follows a three-part blueprint for their moonshot projects that starts with identifying a huge problem and then providing a radical solution that could be implemented using a breakthrough technology.
For Malta, the idea was to find a way to maximize the use of energy generated from renewables. Theirradical solution is bridging the gap between renewable energy and grid-scale energy storage technologies using a breakthrough technology developed by Stanford physicist and Nobel laureate Robert Laughlin.
According to the projects website,this technology is still theoretical and involves storing electricity as either heat within molten salt or cold within a liquid similar to the antifreeze used in cars. They claim this energy could remain stored for up to weeks at a time.
Essentially, Malta is hoping todevelop clean and cost-effective energy storage devices, which is similar to the concept behind Teslas Powerpack. The difference between the Malta projects tech and the Powerpack is mostly whats inside. While Teslas energy storage device uses 16 individual battery pods, Maltas relies on molten salt or the antifreeze-like liquid.
Additionally, the tanks used to store the salt used by Maltas system could potentially last for up to 40 years, which the project claims is three or more times longer than other current storage options. That extended lifespan would make Maltaa cheaper alternative to other renewable energy storage devices.
After two years of developingand designing their system, the Malta team is now gearing up to test the commercial viability of their technology. The next step is to build a megawatt-scale prototype plant which would be large enough to prove the technology at commercial scale, according to their website.
We now have multiple ways to generate energy from renewables, but if we ever hope to fully transition away from traditional energy solutions, we need better storage devices. Though they are clearly betterfor the environment, renewables arent as consistent as fossil fuels, and that unreliability is a huge barrier to widespread adoption.
Storage systems like those proposed by Malta could collect the energy generated by renewables and ensure it is available to power grids whenever needed, putting us one step closer to a future completely free of fossil fuels.
Excerpt from:
Google's Parent Company Will Soon Compete With Tesla for Energy Storage Solutions - Futurism
Posted in Futurism
Comments Off on Google’s Parent Company Will Soon Compete With Tesla for Energy Storage Solutions – Futurism
A UK Woman Has an Extra Cone Cell in Her Eyes and Can See More Colors – Futurism
Posted: at 5:40 pm
In BriefMost people are trichromats, possessing three types of conecells to see color with. A woman in northern England has four typesof working cone cells, which means she has the ability to see farmore colors than most of us can.
After more than 25 years of searching, neuroscientists in the UK recently announced that theyve discovered a woman who has an extra type of cone cell the receptor cells that detect color in her eyes.
According to estimates, that means she can see an incredible 99 million more colors than the rest of us, and the scientists think shes just one of a number of people with super-vision, which they call tetrachromats, living amongst us.
Most humans are trichromats, which means we have three types of cone cells in our eyes.
Each type of cone cell is thought to be able to distinguish around 100 shades, so when you factor in all the possible combinations of these three cone cells combined, it means we can distinguish around 1 million different colors.
Most people who are color blind only have two functioning types of cone cells, which is why they can only see around 10,000 shades and almost all other mammals, including dogs and New World monkeys, are also dichromats.
But theres one doctor in northern England who has four cone cell types, taking the potential number of colors she can distinguish up to 100 million colors most of us have never even dreamed of.
Identified only as cDa29, the scientists finally found this woman two years ago, but theyve been searching for more than 25 years and think there are more tetrachromats like her out there.
So how do you get a fourth type of cone cell?
The idea of tetrachromats was firstsuggested back in 1948by Dutch scientist HL de Vries, who discovered something interesting about the eyes of color blind people.
While color blind men only possess two normal cone cells and one mutant cone thats less sensitive to either green or red light, he showed that the mothers and daughters of color blind men had one mutant cone andthree normal cones.
That meant they had four types of cone cells, even though only three were working normally something that was unheard of before then.
Despite the significance of the finding, no one paid much attention to tetrachromats until the late 80s,when John Mollon from Cambridge Universitystarted searching for womenwho might have four functioning cone cells.
Assuming that color blind men pass this fourth cone cell onto their daughters, Mollon estimated that around12 percent of the female populationshould be tetrachromats.
But all of his tests showed that these women could only perceive the same colours as the rest of us which meant only three of their cone cell types were working, so they werent true tetrachromats.
Then, in 2007, neuroscientist Gabriele Jordan from Newcastle University in the UK, who had formerly worked alongside Mollon, decided to try a slightly different test to look for this super-vision.
She took 25 women who had a fourth type of cone cell, and put them in a dark room. Looking into a light device, three colored circles of light flashed before these womens eyes.
To a trichromat, they all looked the same, but Jordan hypothesized that a true tetrachromat would be able to tell them apart thanks to the extra subtlety afforded to her by her fourth cone.
Incredibly, one of the women tested, cDa29, was able to differentiate the three different colored circles in every single test.
I was jumping up and down,Jordan told Veronique Greenwood fromDiscovermagazine.
So if so many female children of color blind men have four cones, why have we only been able to find one true tetrachromat?
For starters, the team was only looking within the UK. But the bigger issue that Jordan thinks most true tetrachromats would never need to use their fourth cone cell type, and so would never realize they had special vision.
We now know tetrachromacy exists,she told Greenwood. But we dont know what allows someone to become functionally tetrachromatic, when most four-coned women arent.
Jay Neitz, a vision researcher at the University of Washington, who wasnt involved in the study,thinks that it might take practiceand specially designed hues to truly unlock the power of tetrachromats.
Most of the things that we see as colored are manufactured by people who are trying to make colors that work for trichromats,he said.It could be that our whole world is tuned to the world of the trichromat.
In other words, the colors we use are so limited that the fourth cone cell never gets a work out.
The research on cDa29 hasnt been peer-reviewed or published as yet, and Jordan is continuing her research and search for more tetrachromats.
Theres a lot more work to be done and Jordans results need to be replicated and verified. But if we can confirm that tetrachromats really do exist, it wont just teach us about the limitations of human senses, it could help scientists develop better artificial sensing devices, and also help us figure out more about how vision works.
One thing we might never be able to understand, sadly, is exactly what the world looks like through cDa29s eyes, seeing as its our brains that truly perceive color our cone cells just receive the data to be processed.
This private perception is what everybody is curious about,Jordan toldDiscover.I would love to see that.
Read more from the original source:
A UK Woman Has an Extra Cone Cell in Her Eyes and Can See More Colors - Futurism
Posted in Futurism
Comments Off on A UK Woman Has an Extra Cone Cell in Her Eyes and Can See More Colors – Futurism