Category Archives: Transhumanist

Clothing and Accessories Olafs Own.

Being crypto-rich is nice, but Olaf Carlson-Wee, a Bitcoin prophet and the founder of the blockchain investment firm Polychain Capital, has grander designs than securing the bag. The 33-year-old Minnesota native wants to make the world a (much, much) better place. Here, he speaks to the philosopher and fellow transhumanist David Pearce about the future of finance, his controversial views on life-extending gene editing, and the end of all suffering.

DAVID PEARCE: Good to see you, Olaf. Greetings from Brighton, England.

OLAF CARLSON-WEE: Im in Manhattan. Very excited to be talking.

PEARCE: I thought we could start by letting people know how we first got to know each other.

CARLSON-WEE: I was an undergraduate student at Vassar College in upstate New York when I stumbled across your archive. I dont remember how I found it, but I kept reading all of these incredible essays and I realized that they were part of this massive web of sites. This must have been in 2010 or 11, right around the time that I was getting interested in cryptocurrency. I sent you an email. We didnt reconnect for years after that. I went off and started a whole endeavor in the cryptocurrency world. First I got involved with Coinbase [a cryptocurrency trading platform]. At that time, it was an extremely nascent early-stage business, running out of an apartment in San Francisco. I was there for three-and-a-half years, and then left that to start my current business, Polychain Capital, which is an investment firm in the cryptocurrency space. At Polychain, we started a speaker series called Strange Genius in 2018. The idea was to bring in outsider thinkers, people who have really interesting ideas about art or technology or how the world can be improved. I thought of you right away. Thats when you first came to San Francisco and we were actually able to meet in person. Id love it if you gave a brief summary of the stuff you wrote that got me so excited as an undergraduate.

PEARCE: Thank you for that. Back in 1995, I wrote an online manifesto, The Hedonistic Imperative, which in spite of its rather debauched title, aims to be morally serious. It essentially outlines how its going to be possible to phase out the biology of pain and suffering in favor of a new architecture of mindlife based entirely on information-sensitive gradients of wellbeing, and eventually superhuman bliss. As well as the philosophical transhumanist stuff, Ive also done practical work on things like the good drug guide, which gives an overview of different pharmacological interventions with an interest in raising pain thresholds, as well as work on gene drives and cultured meat and so forth, because the abolitionist project is about the abolition of suffering in all sentient life, not just humans. Essentially what I aim to do is put my work in the public domain so that young movers and shakers like you will maintain the project. One thing that we have in common is that our passions run opposed to conventional thought. To what extent has this been a consistent theme in your life? How do you overcome the skeptics?

Jacket, Pants, and Shoes by Prada. Necklace Olafs Own.

CARLSON-WEE: That was indeed the reaction from almost everybody in my life back in 2011, when I first got immersed in the world of Bitcoin. I had decided to write my undergraduate thesis on cryptocurrencythe technology, and the social implications of what would happen if it were to grow substantially. My professors were very skeptical of the entire concept. Nobody had ever heard of Bitcoin or cryptocurrency. But my whole life, Ive felt a little bit like an alien. I was born and raised in rural Minnesota. Both of my parents were Lutheran ministers. I had to seek out alternative media and resources online to learn about things that werent directly around me in a world that was church, and school, and soccer. Ive found that when you stick to your own personal intuition, you often get the best outcome. You need to be tethered to reality and make sure that youre being analytical in your thinking. At the same time, following my intuition, even when Im not totally sure where it will take me, has been critical to finding the path that I want to be on. Youve really stuck with a lot of ideas that people might find not only disinteresting, but morally reprehensible. How have you dealt with the haters?

PEARCE: The haters are a minority. Most people, when they stumble across the idea of getting rid of suffering altogether, think of utopian dreaming. Surprisingly, the most opposition Ive encountered is about phasing out predators like lions and tigers. I think well need to genetically reprogram them. Some people are absolutely aghast at that idea, but if we are morally serious about getting rid of suffering, were going to have to edit our genetic source code. This invites charges of eugenics. But I think all prospective parents should have access to pre-implantation genetic screening and counseling, and soon CRISPR genome editing, replacing todays genetic crapshoot. Technically speaking, this is eugenics. I dont like the term in view of 20th century historyit can trigger some very strange feelings. I assumed that my views were essentially unpublishable. Then the World Wide Web came along and I realized it was possible to get these views to a global audience. What interested you in Bitcoin when you were at college?

CARLSON-WEE: I entered college in 2008, right in the wake of the financial crisis. There was a feeling that the entire system was stilted against the little guy, and that the incumbent interests of the legacy financial systems and Wall Street were really there for their benefit and not for our benefit as regular people. It made me start thinking about who controls the system of currency. The Federal Reserve, as it turns out, is a pseudo-private entity that controls the dollar. And its unelected officials who determine what the value of the dollar is, and how banks can borrow it. Things like that have massive rippling implications for the entire global economy. When I was getting into Bitcoin, I didnt have a clear view of how it would all play out. But I had an intuitive feeling that if we could rewrite the global economic and financial system with a software-based substrate that was run by an algorithm that nobody controlled, rather than by a central bank system, there would be a huge wealth transfer from traditional elites to those in the cryptocurrency sphere. Over the last ten years, weve seen this play out in a pretty big way. The incredible part is that anybody can write that software. Its not closed off in the same way as traditional finance. Its not perfect, but I do think its a massive improvement.

Clothing and Accessories Olafs Own.

PEARCE: After school you spent quite a lot of time alone in northern Minnesota. Could you say a bit more about this time in your life?

CARLSON-WEE: After I graduated in 2012, I had a long thesis on cryptocurrency, and not a lot of real skills for the hard-nosed economy I was about to enter. I spent about a year traveling around the United States, mostly living out of a backpack with a tent and a sleeping bag, crashing on friends couches. I was resistant to jump into a system that I didnt necessarily want to be a part of. The prospect of getting a nine-to-five job, paying rent, and living in a city was not very appealing to me. I ended up working as a lumberjack in a small communal mountain town in northern Washington called Holden Village. It wasnt a commercial lumber operation; I was literally creating wood to heat the village over the winter. The town was created around a copper mine but it went bankrupt and was taken over by the Lutheran church in the 60s. It was co-opted by hippies in the 60s and 70s, and continues to be this amazing example of a voluntary community that oscillates between the winter and the summer from about 60 to maybe 350 people. It was a very peaceful and quiet life. After my stint as a lumberjack, I went to northern Minnesota to stay in my grandparents cabin that was built in the 40s. I didnt really see anyone for a couple of months while I was there. Thats when I went really deep and decided that cryptocurrency was what I wanted to work on. I continued expanding on my undergraduate thesis. I also got into electronic music production, and deeper into ideas of transhumanism and life-extension. I was thinking of ways that we could improve the legacy system we have that was designed for reproduction, and not necessarily for the well-being of the person that has to live with it. That was the philosophical foundation for what I want to promote in the world, which is not just the redistribution of resources through politics, but solving the deepest problems of the human condition through technology. It was a very deep and intense time that ended with me sleeping on a friends couch in Oakland. Thats when I cold-emailed Coinbase and said, Ill do any job. I started there as customer support in early 2013, and the rest is history.

PEARCE: Can you describe your own personal vision of the future?

CARLSON-WEE: I think its possible to create technologies that keep us nimble, healthy, and mentally agile for much longer than we naturally biologically would. I also think its possible to improve massively on our hedonic set point, the default state of being that we live every day, with biotechnology and tools like genetic engineering to massively improve the Darwinian hardware were born into. This is the big project we need to focus on. We will never solve the biggest problems through political solutions that rearrange the way resources are distributed. My hope is that cryptocurrency can be a globally distributed and democratized financial substrate, and can unlock the ability to fund and research a future that is focused, not just on making people materially wealthier, but qualitatively happier and healthier. I think everybody agrees that once people have a warm place to sleep and food to eat, what really matters to them is friends and family and the quality of their experiences, rather than further enhancement of the physical conditions of their existence. I hope that in the far future, we can have infinite bliss, immortality, and wont need to worry so much about material conditions for the average person. I hope we can get to a place where people can be comfortable with very little, and not be in this rat race of consumption, and focus instead on artistic endeavors like film and music and immersive virtual reality. These things can create sublime experiences for people while working to improve the hardware that were running, the hardware being our physical bodies. To me, the mind is the final frontier.

Clothing and Accessories Olafs Own.

PEARCE: Yes. As a transhumanist I believe in a civilization of super intelligence, super longevity and super happiness. The era of scientific exploration has only just begun. But back to the here and now. Everyone knows you as a cryptocurrency expert. What are your other passions?

CARLSON-WEE: One of the ways that I got interested in what consciousness could be, if we could manipulate it with a more rigorous scientific approach, was lucid dreaming. For nine years, I wrote down my dreams every morning when I woke up, and gained an incredible ability to control them. The lucid dream state is remarkable because of two things. One, there are innate rules that we take for granted, so things like gravity or time can be heavily manipulated. And two, you can manifest anything to your senses that you can imagine. Theres this incredible feedback loop between your imagination and your senses that isntthere when you are awake. Im hopeful that more people can experience that, because its incredibly powerful and freeing to be able to map your imagination onto your senses. Im also very interested in experimental art like music production, independent film, and fiction writing, and being a patron for emerging artists. I cant talk about it yet, but Im producing my first television show and Im very excited about it. Art is another way that people can elevate themselves and have sublime experiences that expand their vision of whats possible. Theres such an incredible focus on politics in modern society, and which politician is right or wrong. Its not that its not important, its that theres a whole other set of questions about what were trying to do as a society that people dont ask much. Im hopeful that more and more people will wake up to the idea of massively improving the human condition.

PEARCE: Thanks for sharing your vision.

CARLSON-WEE: Its great to talk and I wish you the best. And when I say the best, I mean, as youve often signed your emails to me, infinite bliss.

PEARCE: Infinite bliss to you, too.

Grooming: Annette Chaisson using Sykn Iceland at Exclusive Artists

Fashion Assistant: Anna Huge

Read more from the original source:
After Winning Big on Crypto, Olaf Carlson-Wee Wants to Change the World - Interview

Image via Tukker_Barnes/YouTube

Late Tuesday evening, comedian and magician John Edward Szeles aka The Amazing Johnathan, passed away after a long struggle with heart disease. His last words were spoken to his wife and manager of many years, Anastasia Synn. Now many of the performers well-wishers want to know more about Synn, one of the most important people in Johnathans life.

Synn and Szeles were married in 2014. Like Szeles, Synn was also a magician, as well as a sideshow stunt performer, and performance artist. The pair met while Synn was performing at the Harmon Theater, where Szeles performed for over six years. The couple worked together at Ballys Casino in Las Vegas for a few years before they were wed in a ceremony at A Special Memory Chapel in Las Vegas in front of an audience made up of A-list Vegas performers, including Penn and Teller, Jeff McBride, and David Copperfield. Comedian Gallagher performed the ceremony.

As a magician, Synn specializes in a shocking brand of magic that features, among other things inserting large needles completely through her arm. Synn has performed her act on Penn and Tellers Fool Us and has appeared alongside The Amazing Johnathan on Pax TVs Masters of Illusion. Synn appeared on the cover of Vanish, the international magic magazine, for its September 2019 issue. In addition to her managerial duties, Synn had worked alongside her husband for several years and would often take over the show when Szeles became too fatigued to continue.

In addition to her career as a performer, Synn is also known as a biohacktivist and as an advocate for transhumanism. Synn currently has 26 magnets and microchips embedded in her body. According to her website, she uses the implants for the purposes of magic, experimentation, and extended sensory perception. The biohacking community claim that the magnets can endow the implantee with a sense of electromagnetic awareness while the chips can perform various functions such as activating Synns home computer or unlocking her doors. Synns testimony in front of the Nevada Senate regarding a law prohibiting RFID chip implants was instrumental in defeating the bill.

Synn took to Facebook Tuesday night after her husband became unresponsive to make a plea for privacy in her time of grief. Syn wrote, I dont think we thought this day would ever come because he is so strong and has beaten it so many times. Thank you for all the well wishes, but as the news spreads its getting overwhelming and Im going to have to take a step back. I love you and thank you for your support.

'+// ''+// '

Go here to read the rest:
Who Is Anastasia Synn, Widow of Magician The Amazing Johnathan? - We Got This Covered

22/02/2022 - The leading Swiss festival and forum on human rights is ready to explore all the burning issues through a selection of films and events

Red Jungle by Juan Jos Lozano and Zoltn Horvth

Taking place in Geneva from 4-13 March, the 20th edition of the International Film Festival and Forum on Human Rights (FIFDH) offers an international selection of fiction films and documentaries, as well as debates, interviews, meetings, master classes, exhibitions and a concert by Barbara Hendricks, the festivals patron. The FIFDH is bringing in new audio and video formats, several exclusive podcasts and a selection of films on VoD.

A total of nine films are taking part in the Competition Fiction, with the mixed-animation drama Red Jungle by Juan Jos Lozano and Zoltn Horvth (Switzerland/France) having its world premiere. The section also includes 107 Mothers[+see also: filmreviewtrailerinterview: Peter Kerekesfilmprofile] by Peter Kerekes (Slovakia/Czech Republic/Ukraine), Casablanca Beats[+see also: filmreviewtrailerfilmprofile] by Nabil Ayouch (France/Morocco), Europa[+see also: filmreviewtrailerfilmprofile] by Haider Rashid (Italy/Kuwait/Iraq), Freda[+see also: filmreviewtrailerfilmprofile] by Gessica Gnus (Haiti/Benin/France), Good Madam by Jenna Cato Bass (South Africa), Hit the Road by Panah Panahi (Iran), Luzzu[+see also: filmreviewtrailerinterview: Alex Camillerifilmprofile] by Alex Camilleri (Malta/USA) and Vera Dreams of the Sea[+see also: filmreviewtrailerinterview: Kaltrina Krasniqifilmprofile] by Kaltrina Krasniqi (Kosovo/North Macedonia/Albania).

Furthermore, nine documentaries are included in the Competition - Creative Documentaries, with two of them, Angels of Sinjar by Oscar-nominated filmmaker Hanna Polak (Libya/Italy) and Je suis noires by Juliana Fanjul and Rachel M'Bon (Switzerland), having their world premieres at FIFDH. The remainder of the selection features A Night of Knowing Nothing[+see also: filmreviewfilmprofile] by Payal Kapadia (India/France), After a Revolution[+see also: filmreviewfilmprofile] by Giovanni Buccomino (UK/Italy), Invisible Demons by Rahul Jain (India/Finland/Germany/USA), The Last Shelter[+see also: filmreviewtrailerfilmprofile] by Ousmane Samassekou (Mali/France/South Africa), Nelly & Nadine[+see also: filmreviewtrailerinterview: Magnus Gerttenfilmprofile] by Magnus Gertten (Sweden/Belgium/Norway), The Silence of the Mole by Anas Taracena (Guatemala) and Penelope My Love[+see also: filmreviewinterview: Claire Doyonfilmprofile] by Claire Doyon (France).

Also, 20 debates, eight in-depth interviews, six conversations and six activists' talks are featured this year. Among them is a debate with whistle-blower Chelsea Manning, while artificial intelligence and transhumanism will be discussed with neuroscientist Olaf Blanke and philosopher Nita Farahany. Ecology and the rights of nature are at the core of two debates, and green finance will be examined by essayist Lucile Schmidt and explorer Bertrand Piccard. Finally, a discussion about Why Does It Take So Long for Humans to Respect Human Rights? will bring together former UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Kate Gilmore, neuroscientist Nayef Al-Rodhan and primatologist Richard Wrangham. The FIFDH honours women and gender minorities, welcoming Sudanese photographer Eythar Gubara, artist Chuu Wai Nyein from Myanmar, Afghan filmmaker Shahrbanoo Sadat and Iranian Nobel Peace Prize laureate Shirin Ebadi.

Finally, the FIFDH is launching a network of podcasts on cinema and human rights in conjunction with its partners, where filmmakers, artists, researchers, authors, journalists, photographers and reporters will share their personal experiences, creative processes and the qualities that make them unique, thus helping to question our identities, build a collective memory and testify to a changing world.

Read more here:
The 20th FIFDH announces its programme - Cineuropa

In the wake of Valentines Day, the most straightforward answer to the question posed by the title of feminist philosopher Nina Powers new book What Do Men Want (2022) appears simple a woman a man, or perhaps, someone with a different gender identity.

But in the 2020s, asking the question is itself provocative, and many feminists might immediately revolt at the premise. It might be one reason the book, according to an anecdote from a sales clerk, is not being stocked in many branches of Waterstones (something it seems to share with some other recent books on feminism and gender).

Although sexism has by no means been eliminated across liberal democratic societies, some problems men shoulder are rarely acknowledged, including disproportionate drug use, male-on-male physical violence, and others, Power observes.

A scattering of responses to the question What do Men Want? appear across the pages of the book. Central among them include virtues traditionally associated with men but are also exhibited by women, including self-control, courage, and the ability to juggle seriousness, humour, and forgiveness.

It is these traits, Power argues, that, even more so than men themselves, are today deemed obsolete or toxic at a time when people of both sexes can fulfil their desires instantly online via porn and dating apps or through shopping sprees.

The actual villains in much of What do Men Want are neither men nor women, but the impersonal, though seductive, entities of capitalism and computer technologies. In 2022, these include social media apps and the beckoning sirens of performative sites including OnlyFans and the appeal of a pain-free existence via Zoom.

The major commonality What Do Men Want has with Powers previous major work, One-Dimensional Woman, is an analysis of how the imperatives of consumerism to embody a stereotype of a feminine or masculine ideal is leaving people friendless and isolated.

Philosopher, sociologist and cultural theorist Jean Baudrillards prescient analysis of a dystopian world dominated by a blizzard of visuals and deceptive imagery is evoked repeatedly to underscore the jungle women, and especially men, inhabit today.

In an environment of distrust, examples of men as dangerous and male violence viewed as a semi-essential characteristic, has only dumped more poison into the social well. No wonder, Power reflects, men are seeking an exit, whether that be a zombified life in front of a video game system, or, tragically, via suicide, a disturbing trend affecting men more than women.

Power is unafraid to discuss the ins and outs of an alphabet soup of internet subcultures including incels, NoFAP, and MGTOW that have been considered controversial at best and are linked to terrorism at worst.

Involvement in these groups, she argues, is not innately pathological, but demonstrates a longing among men and boys for genuine father figures, which in feminist literature embody the ultimate Big Bad the patriarchy.

Absent a validatory image of the father, Power argues, sibling rivalry between and among men and women has run rampant. Nowhere is this more virulent than in the fever swamps of Twitter, where the desire to eliminate the competition translates into cancel culture and sneering digital cliques.

Even worse, she adds, perpetual immaturity and infantilization reign. The safetyism increasingly demanded in transactional relationships not only between men and women, but between the state and the human being, has had a chilling effect in public and private spheres alike.

In this culture, controversial gurus including Jordan Peterson and pseudo-anonymous influencers have struck a chord with their disciplinary tone. So too have fully uncorked leaders that promise an escape from freedom, representing masculinity at its worst, such as Donald Trump. In South Korea, so-called angry young men are currently driving political debate, by fomenting a sweaty discontent over the supposedly dangerous egalitarianism promoted by a culture increasingly accepting of womens rights.

At 179 pages, this is an impassioned essay of a book. It does not aim to be, nor succeeds in being, comprehensive. Some burning issues debated by feminist philosophers, and in the Anglosphere media alike, including transgenderism and transhumanism, are discussed and hang over the text, but are not directly addressed. The college participation gap between men and women and the continued existence of the stereotype that being interested in academic achievement is somehow unmanly would also be interesting topics to examine at greater length.

A taboo cry to accept the imperatives of risk can be heard in the pages of What Do Men Want?, and this is a risky book. It is also a vital one, a defiant flame that refuses to be dampened by the social rain of voguish expectations and political pieties.

Read more:
What Do Men Want Review Guys and Dolls in the Digital Age - The Boar

American political party

Political party in United States

The Transhumanist Party is a political party in the United States. The party's platform is based on the ideas and principles of transhumanist politics, e.g., human enhancement, human rights, science, life extension, and technological progress.[3][4][5]

The Transhumanist Party was founded in 2014 by Zoltan Istvan. Istvan became the first political candidate to run for office under the banner of the Transhumanist Party when he announced his candidacy for President of the United States in the United States presidential election of 2016.[4] As part of his campaign Zoltan and a cadre of transhumanist activists and embedded journalists embarked on a four month journey in the coffin-shaped Immortality Bus, which traveled on a winding cross-country route from San Francisco to Washington D.C. The Transhumanist Party has been featured or mentioned in many major media sites, including the National Review,[6] Business Insider,[7] Extreme Tech, Vice,[8] Wired,[9] The Telegraph, The Huffington Post,[4] The Joe Rogan Experience,[10] Heise Online,[11] Gizmodo,[12] and Reason.[13] Political scientist Roland Benedikter said the formation of the Transhumanist Party in the USA was one of three reasons transhumanism entered into the mainstream in 2014, creating "a new level of public visibility and potential impact."[14]

Following the end of the 2016 presidential election, after Zoltan's 2016 presidential campaign was completed, Gennady Stolyarov II became the Chairman of the party and the organisation was restructured. Under Chairman Stolyarov, the party adopted a new Constitution,[15] which included three immutable Core Ideals in Article I, Section I:[16]

New positions were founded, including Pavel Ilin became Secretary, Dinorah Delfin Director of Admissions and Public Relations, Arin Vahanian as Director of Marketing, Sean Singh as Director of Applied Innovation, Brent Reitze as Director of Publication, Franco Cortese as Director of Scholarship, and B.J. Murphy as Director of Social Media.[17] Restructured advisor positions included Zoltan Istvan as Political and Media Advisor, Bill Andrews as Biotechnology Advisor, Jose Cordeiro as Technology Advisor, Newton Lee as Education and Media Advisor, Keith Comito as Crowdfunding Advisor, Aubrey de Grey as Anti-Aging Advisor, Rich Lee as Biohacking Advisor, Katie King as Media Advisor, Ira Pastor as Regeneration Advisor, Giovanni Santostasi as Regeneration Advisor, Elizabeth Parrish as Advocacy Advisor, and Paul Spiegel as Legal Advisor.

The U.S. Transhumanist Party held six Platform votes during January, February, March, May, June, and November 2017, on the basis of which 82 Platform planks were adopted.[18] The U.S. Transhumanist Party holds votes of its members electronically and is the first political party in the United States to use ranked-preference voting method with instant runoffs in its internal ballots.[19]

In May 2018 the New York Times reported the U.S. Transhumanist Party as having 880 members.[20] On July 7, 2018, the U.S. Transhumanist Party reached 1,000 members and released a demographic analysis of its membership.[1] This analysis showed that 704 members, or 70.4%, were eligible to vote in the United States, whereas 296 or 29.6% were allied members.

During this time, the Transhumanist Party hosted several expert discussion panels, on subjects including artificial intelligence,[21] life extension,[22] art and transhumanism,[23] and cryptocurrencies.[24] Chairman Stolyarov has also hosted in-person Enlightenment Salons, which were aimed at cross-disciplinary discussion of transhumanist and life-extensionist ideas under the auspices of the U.S. Transhumanist Party.[25][26][27]

On August 11, 2017, at the RAAD Fest 2017 conference in San Diego, California, Chairman Stolyarov gave an address entitled "The U.S. Transhumanist Party: Pursuing a Peaceful Political Revolution for Longevity", which provided an overview of the U.S. Transhumanist Party's key principles and objectives.[28] In October 2017 Hank Pellissier founded the "Transhuman Party" following a trademark dispute with Zoltan Istvan's continued ownership of the 'Transhumanist Party' trademark. In response to Pellissier, the U.S. Transhumanist Party published its FAQ, where a significant portion was devoted to explaining the history of the U.S. Transhumanist Party, its current interactions with Zoltan Istvan and the scope of his involvement, and the reasons for his continued ownership of the 'Transhumanist Party' trademark.[29] The Transhuman Party became defunct in late 2017 due to lack of activity and its domain name and Facebook page were acquired by the US Transhumanist Party.[2]

By September 2017 the Party had appointed a number of international ambassadors, from Brazil, Bulgaria, Canada, Chile, Egypt, England, Hong Kong, India, Nigeria, and Scotland.[30] On November 9, 2017, in a virtual presentation at the TransVision 2017 conference in Brussels, Belgium, Chairman Stolyarov gave an overview of the U.S. Transhumanist Party's achievements in 2017 and future aspirations.[31] On March 31, 2018 Chairman Stolyarov was interviewed by Nikola Danaylov, a.k.a. Socrates, of Singularity.FM during a three-hour session, the longest of all of Danaylov's interviews.[32]

The Transhumanist Party presidential primary attracted media attention from BioEdge[33] and the Milwaukee Record.[34] While some media outlets reported Zoltan Istvan was considering running again,[35] ultimately he did not join the party's primary. After a protracted primary process with nine candidates, featuring numerous debates,[36] Johannon Ben Zion was elected as the party's nominee. After winning the primary, Ben Zion gave his acceptance speech at RAAD Fest 2019 in Las Vegas.[37] and filed with the FEC.[38] Shortly thereafter, film producer, entrepreneur, and longevity organizer Charlie Kam became Ben Zion's running mate. On October 19, 2019, Ben Zion spoke to the DC Transhumanists meetup in Arlington, VA.[39] On November 3, 2019 he spoke at the Foresight Institute's Vision Weekend Event in San Francisco. On November 24, 2019 he spoke to undergraduates at Princeton University as part of the Princeton Envision conference.[40] On March 4, 2020, Ben Zion participated in the Free & Equal Elections Foundation's Open Presidential debate in Chicago, Illinois.[41] Zoltan Istvan also participated in the debate, running as a Republican.[42]

On June 12, 2020, it was announced that Ben Zion had left the Transhumanist Party, with him declaring that his belief in Techno-progressivism was incompatible with the party, and that he would instead be pursuing a run for the Reform Party nomination. Kam was declared the replacement presidential nominee.[43][44] In June 2020 Charlie Kam participated in a panel with London Futurists and in July 2020 his campaign received press coverage in the Daily Express.[45] On August 21, 2020, Kam announced his selection of Elizabeth (Liz) Parrish as his Vice-Presidential running mate.[46]

A few days after his departure from the party, Ben Zion published a video purporting to show him eating a cellular culture of his own skin cells which reportedly were grown in the lab of a startup he is affiliated with, Quixotic Life Sciences.[47][48] In a statement disavowing the stunt published on the USTP website, it was noted that USTP officers previously warned Ben Zion that he would be disavowed if he pursued this reckless project.[49]

A core tenet of the USTP platform is that more funding is needed for research into human life extension research and research to reduce existential risk. More generally, the goal is to raise awareness among the general public about how technologies can enhance the human species.[18][51] Democratic transhumanists and libertarian transhumanists tend to be in disagreement over the role of government in society, but both agree that laws should not encumber technological human progress.[52]

The Transhumanist Party platform promotes national and global prosperity by sharing technologies and creating enterprises to lift people and nations out of poverty, war, and injustice.[53][54] The Transhumanist Party also supports LGBT rights, drug legalization, and sex work legalization. The party seeks to fully subsidize university-level education while also working to "create a cultural mindset in America that embracing and producing radical technology and science is in the best interest of our nation and species."[4][55]

In terms of foreign policy and national defense, the party wants to reduce the amount of money spent on foreign wars and use the money domestically.[3] The party also advocates managing and preparing for existential risks, completely eliminating dangerous diseases, and proactively guarding against abuses of technology, such as nanotechnology, synthetic viruses, and artificial intelligence.[3][4]

The USTP expressly supports the rights of Artificial General Intelligence entities that are sentient and/or lucid. The Transhumanist Bill of Rights Version 3.0 recognizes 7 levels of sentience, and requires entities to exist at level 5 or higher to be considered as having rights. At level 5, the main criterion is that the entity be "lucid", meaning the entity is "meta-aware", or aware of its own awareness.[56]

The various policy points of the US Transhumanist Party's platform have attracted both praise and criticism from sociologist Steve Fuller. For example, Fuller has praised the centrality of morphological freedom in the US Transhumanist Party's bill of rights,[57] but on the other hand he has also written that the party is too critical of the US Department of Defense, which he argues could be an ally for some transhumanist initiatives such as human enhancement and existential risk reduction.[58] In 2018 the party as a whole was reviewed favorably as an example of a successful "niche" party by Krisztian Szabados, a director at the Edmond J. Safra Center for Ethics at Harvard University.[59]

The Transhumanist Party in Europe is the umbrella organization that supports the national level transhumanist parties in Europe by developing unified policies and goals for the continent.[61][62] Among them is the UK Transhumanist Party, which was founded in January 2015.[63][64][65] In October 2015, Amon Twyman, the party's leader at the time, published a blog post distancing the UK party from Zoltan Istvan's campaign.[66]

Read the original:
Transhumanist Party - Wikipedia

Sherri Tenpenny is an influential religious-right anti-vaccine activist who has testified before the Ohio state House, appeared on Charlie Kirks podcast, and been a speaker at multiple ReAwaken America events, where she has shared the stage with the likes of Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, Eric Trump, Mike Lindell, Michael Flynn, Roger Stone, and Alex Jones.

Despite the fact that Tenpenny is an osteopathic doctor with no expertise on vaccines, she regularly appears on right-wing programs where she spreads wild conspiracy theories about COVID-19 vaccines.

Recently, she has begun to claim that COVID-19 vaccines are designed to create quantum entanglement between those who take them and the internet in an effort to turn humanity into transhumanist cyborgs.

The stated goal is to depopulate the planet and the ones that are left, either make them chronically sick or turn them into transhumanist cyborgs that can be manipulated externally by 5G, by magnets, by all sorts of things, Tenpenny said during an appearance on The Stew Peters Show Thursday night. I got dragged through the mud by the mainstream media when I said that in May of last year in front of the House committee in Columbus, [Ohio]. Well, guess what? Its all true.

The whole issue of quantum entanglement and what the shots do in terms of the frequencies and the electronic frequencies that come inside of your body and hook you up to the Internet of Things, the quantum entanglement that happens immediately after youre injected, she continued. You get hooked up to what theyre trying to develop. Its called the hive mind, and they want all of us there as a node and as an electronic avatar that is an exact replica of us except its an electronic replica, its not our God given body that we were born with. And all of that will be running through the metaverse that theyre talking about. All of these things are real, Stew. All of them. And its happening right now. Its not some science fiction thing happening out in the future; its happening right now in real time.

This article was originally published by Right Wing Watch and is republished here by permission.

Read more:
Anti-vaxx 'expert' claims vaccines will turn people into ...

Arin Vahanian

Its something nearly all of us have heard (or have even said) at some point in our lives: Doesnt he look great for his age? Or how about, Its hard to believe that she is 85! At first glance, it may seem like an act of kindness to say such things. Indeed, I am all for making people feel better about themselves and encouraging people to be better and to do better, in life. However, if we observe the thought process behind such statements, we may find that it is dishonest to say such things. No matter how good someone may look in their advanced age, the facts remain that a 20-year-old will always look better than an 80-year-old. It is also true that a 20-year-old will be healthier than an 80-year-old.

But why am I stating the obvious? After all, isnt aging inevitable? Also, shouldnt we have some compassion for the elderly? While admitting the reality of the current situation in regard to aging and aging-related diseases and having compassion for others is very important, we need to take a deep look at how our views, beliefs, and actions may actually be preventing us from helping many millions of people avoid needless pain and suffering. These very same views, beliefs, and actions may be condemning those same people to years or decades of poor health and may also be preventing us from achieving improvement and mastery in life.

Please dont get me wrong. I am not saying that we should destroy peoples self-esteem or make the already difficult situation of aging even worse by being insensitive and cruel. However, I am saying that our current beliefs about aging may be preventing us from getting people the help they need so that they can live more productive, healthier, and happier lives. Ultimately, that is what it is all about: helping people to be better and to live better.

It is not shallow to want humans to live longer, healthier lives, and to look, feel, and actually be younger and healthier. It comes from a deep caring for the human condition. I can completely understand why we would say that someone looks great for their age. It is because we find it very difficult to come to terms with the absolute horror of aging, so we try to devise ways to deal with it without actually dealing with it, while making others, and ourselves, feel better about our current plight.

Anyone who has been to a nursing home or retirement home can attest to this. Anyone who thinks that aging can be graceful should visit a nursing home and take a look at all the people unable to move around, feed themselves, or think coherently. Needing assistance with performing basic bodily functions is anything but graceful.

Even though we know deep down inside that it is wrong to insinuate that losing basic bodily functions can be graceful or inspirational, we continue to perpetuate the lie. Why? Because on some level, we need to try to make sense of the cruelty of biology, and we need some way to deal with the horrible prospect of aging and death.

However, no great challenge plaguing humanity was resolved through flowery prose, euphemisms, or by hope alone. Indeed, the entire scientific community joined forces to come up with vaccines for COVID-19 in a matter of months. Sure, it wasnt perfect, and the road was anything but a smooth one, but humanity is capable of great things when we have many people working together on a common goal. Recently, that goal has been the eradication of COVID-19. Why couldnt the next goal be eradicating aging-related diseases?

Now, I understand that the problems of aging-related diseases and aging are infinitely more complex and difficult to tackle than a virus. However, just because something is difficult or complex does not mean we should give up, especially when the stakes are so high. In fact, one could argue that the stakes have never been greater. We could easily perform a thought experiment and visualize the benefits to society in terms of reducing pain and dramatically increasing the quality of life, not to mention ensuring that our economies and societies are healthier and more robust as a result of not having to expend enormous amounts of money, time, and resources to treat people suffering from aging-related illnesses.

Critics of life extension, the prospect of reversing aging, or even Transhumanism itself, may lash out with criticisms such as, If there werent enough problems on Earth, now theyre going after the one thing we cant solve! I have discussed and dispelled the numerous objections to longevity and longevity research in my previous articles, so I wont bring them up here again. However, I will say that while I respect each persons opinions about life extension and longevity, no one has the right to choose how long human beings get to live. Certainly no one has the right to prevent humanity from living happier, healthier lives.

Despite what ones opinion may be about spending time, money, and resources on fighting aging and aging-related diseases, the fact remains that biology does not care how wealthy or poor you are. Dementia does not care if you have been a generous andkind person in life. Aging and aging-related illnesses can and do affect everyone who is lucky enough to become old enough to experience them.

The proper response to the criticisms is to stand tall and to maintain, with scientific data and evidence (of which there is an abundance), the many benefits that society would receive if we were to reverse or eliminate aging and aging-related illnesses. Or, even better, to actually do something about it! We need every available man and woman in the fight against aging-related diseases.

If we are honest with ourselves, the reality of the situation is that we have concocted this myth of aging gracefully so that we can help ourselves deal with the tragedy of aging-related diseases and offer some dignity to those who are suffering from aging-related diseases. In fact, I would go so far as to say that is entirely understandable why we would do this; when faced with something we cannot currently cure, or resolve (the problems of aging, deterioration, and death), it would be downright foolish to deny the problem or to pretend there is a resolution for it, when there isnt. However, we are doing no one any favors by throwing in the towel and resigning ourselves to a state of affairs in which the final years (and in some cases, the final decades) of life are full of pain and decay.

No one should have to succumb to aging-related diseases the way our elderly are currently doing. Understandably, there is much outrage when a young person is killed by a random act of violence, or when war causes a massive loss of life. However, where is the outrage when our loved ones suffer for years, only to shrivel and die, lost in their own loneliness and hopelessness?

A world in which we have vanquished the specter of aging-related illnesses means a world without many millions experiencing massive agonyand pain at the hands of aging, a world where we need not watch our loved ones deteriorate and then perish, and a world without thedespondency and dread that often accompany old age.

The most logical way to approach the subject of aging and aging-related illnesses is not to say that one should approach aging with dignity. There is no dignity in being fed through a tube or in wasting away in a hospital bed, only to later be buried in a wooden box or be burnt to ashes. The most logical way to approach the subject of aging and aging-related diseases is to treat it as we would treat poverty, crime, or any other problem that plagues humanity. We must define the problem and then work on a solution. But if we delude ourselves and somehow try to manipulate society into thinking that suffering and then dying from aging-related illnesses is graceful, we will never solve the problem. We will keep dancing around the problem. We may make ourselves feel better about it temporarily, but the biggest problem is that while we avoid the issue, we ourselves face extinction by the hands of time. Instead of arguing that one can age gracefully, we should be arguing that watching our loved ones suffer and die from aging-related illness is undignified and unacceptable, and that we as a society will do something about it.

Even if we never completely solve the problem of aging and death, if we could at least reduce the massive suffering inflicted upon humanityby the biological process of aging, we will have done humanity a great service. And that would hopefully be a stepping stone to eventually eliminating aging-related illnesses for good. Indeed, there are many millions of elderly languishing in nursing homes or hospitals today, who are hoping and praying for a cure to what ails them. It would truly be a noble cause to offer the elderly some real hope through scientific breakthroughs that promise to cure their suffering and pain. This is the promise of Transhumanism that humanity can be better, and do better. One of the ways we can do better and be better is to banish aging-related diseases to the dustbin of history, thus allowing human beings more time and more opportunities to do great things in life.

Arin Vahanian is the Vice-Chairman of the U.S. Transhumanist Party.

See the original post:
The Myth of Aging Gracefully - transhumanist-party.org

It is now 13 years since Harry Parker stepped on an improvised explosive device in Afghanistan, creating a blast that would result in the loss of both legs. Alongside the physical pain of the subsequent weeks, months and years, he also had to cope with a profound change in his sense of self. He compares the experience to that of Gregor Samsa, the subject of Franz Kafkas The Metamorphosis the strangeness of not being who you used to be, turned into something that sets you apart from those around you.

Equipped with two hi-tech prosthetic limbs, Parker can now walk holding hands with his wife and carry his children on his shoulders. From the outside, it would be easy to conclude that he has adapted extraordinarily well to the event and he says that being an amputee feels normal. But he still considers himself to be a different person a new body with a new identity who is 12% machine.

It is this transformation that forms the emotional and intellectual heart of Parkers fascinating new book, Hybrid Humans, which examines the cutting edge of medical technology and the implications of these developments for our identities. The term hybrid human is personal: it sits more comfortably than other potential descriptions for his experience, Parker says compared with disabled at the one extreme or cyborg at the other.

The term may have the ring of futurism for many readers, but hybrid humans have been around since antiquity. Just consider Tabaketenmut, the daughter of an Egyptian priest who lived about 3,000 years ago. She seems to have lost her big toe to gangrene, which would have been a huge impediment to walking. (The big toe carries 40% of our body weight as we propel ourselves forward.) To solve this problem, she was equipped with an articulated prosthesis, made from wood and leather, with holes that could have laced the artificial toe to the foot. Ancient Romans, meanwhile, created prosthetic limbs from bronze and wood.

Parkers writing is elegant and often lyrical. He is particularly eloquent when describing the psychology of hybridity how the mind melds with the machine. The brain, we hear, can quickly enlarge its body map to encompass a tool, creating the sense that it is a physical part of us. It is the reason that drivers duck when their car passes under a low barrier in some sense, we have become the vehicle. Even an object such as a smartphone can become an extension of our mind as we come to rely on it for memory storage and communication.

This neural flexibility is common to all human beings. We are set up for plug and play, Parker says. But the emotional connection between an amputee such as Parker and the prostheses they wear is necessarily much more profound than most peoples experiences of technology. His legs may not be made of flesh, but they are critical for his humanity. When I am without them, I feel less alive, he writes.

Awe-inspiring innovations have made Parkers current life possible. His right knee, for example, is controlled by a microprocessor, with sophisticated sensors that can gauge the forces on the leg and guide its movements. It is, he says, like having another brain within his limb. And Parker gives us a taste of even more astonishing developments from the technological frontier, describing technologies such as exoskeletons fitted over the body that could allow people who are paralysed to walk again, and robotic skin, fitted with sensors, that could restore a sense of touch to people with spinal cord injuries.

Such successes are often overhyped by the media, but Parker avoids this trap. Newspapers and websites may breathlessly celebrate the use of bionic eyes that can allow people with visual impairments to see again, for instance, but Parker points out that the resolution is very low. At best, someone using these devices can make out a few shapes that may help with navigation. And there are risks. Bionic eyes use metal electrodes implanted in the brain to communicate their signals. The electrical discharge can damage neural tissue, rendering them less effective over time. Scientists may find solutions to these problems such as electrodes coated with stem cells that may sprout roots into the living tissue but progress is made of small steps rather than giant leaps.

Unlike many technology writers, Parker also recognises the social inequalities that are inherent in these innovations. Organisations such as the NHS cannot invest in the most up-to-date prostheses, meaning that the latest technology must be bought with private riches. For some, the necessary funds may come through insurance or compensation but if you are born poor, with a congenital disorder, you may never make use of any of these technological developments within your lifetime. (My mother, an amputee, is still using the same basic design of prosthetic leg that she was given more than four decades ago.) Parker points out that it is often the very people who are most likely to suffer disability who are the least able to afford the best treatment which, of course, makes it harder to find a way out of the poverty trap.

His scepticism is particularly welcome when he meets some transhumanists, the followers of a philosophical movement that advocates the use of technology to overcome the limitations of our evolved brains and bodies. Among their many plans, they suggest that we all be fitted with brain implants that could give us instant access to vast stores of knowledge or link us up to other brains to create telepathic communication. Some transhumanists even hope that technology will allow us to beat death by, for example, uploading our consciousness to an artificial intelligence, so that we are no longer reliant on our ageing and fragile wetware.

For now, these are far-fetched dreams, and its not just the practical challenges of creating this technology that bothers Parker; the goals themselves seem undesirable. I cant imagine the pain, anxiety and frustrations of being a sentient being uploaded to a hard drive what it would be like never again to feel rain on my face, or the visceral feeling of my family when we all bundle together on the sofa for a hug. And doesnt the possibility of death add meaning to our lives that would be lost with technological immortality?

As someone who has lived as a hybrid for more than a decade, Parker never forgets the realities of everyday life, which encompass both pain and beauty. This may be a tour of the scientific avant garde, but the focus is always on the human heart and mind.

David Robson is a science writer and author of The Expectation Effect: How Your Mindset Can Transform Your Life (Canongate)

Hybrid Humans: Dispatches from the Frontiers of Man and Machine by Harry Parker is published by Profile Books and Wellcome Collection (14.99). To support the Guardian and Observer order your copy at guardianbookshop.com. Delivery charges may apply

Go here to see the original:
Hybrid Humans by Harry Parker review man and machine in harmony - The Guardian

Guardians of the Galaxy didnt sell as well as Square Enix expected upon its launch last year.

The publisher shared its disappointment in a financial results briefing earlier this month, but pledged to make up for the slow start through further sales in 2022. Its a shame for Guardians of the Galaxy, which GamesRadar+ rated four stars and deemed to be up there with the best the Marvel movies have to offer. But if developer Eidos Montreal is freed up from making a sequel, that could spell good news for fans of the studios other series, Deus Ex.

Despite strong reviews, the games sales on launch undershot our initial expectations, said Square Enix president Yosuke Matsuda. However, sales initiatives that we kicked off in November 2021 and continued into the new year have resulted in sales growth, and we intend to work to continue to expand sales to make up for the titles slow start.

Eidos Montreal was asked to apply its talent to Guardians of the Galaxy after 2016s Deus Ex: Mankind Divided. The game had been the first major product in an intended Deus Ex Universe - an ongoing, expanding and connected world that would span several Deus Ex games. But as Square Enix redirected the efforts of its top Western studios towards the Marvel license, Deus Ex fell by the wayside.

Its fair to say that Square Enixs Marvel initiative hasnt been the immediate pop-cultural slam dunk it had hoped for - but the publisher isnt struggling. While net sales in the HD Games segment that included Guardians of the Galaxy and Outriders were lower than during the same period in the previous fiscal year, the company benefitted from the sharp growth in Final Fantasy 14 subscribers that surrounded Endwalker.

Perhaps now, with Guardians of the Galaxy in the rear view mirror, the publisher might look to revive its Deus Ex Universe. The series enjoyed a resurgence in popularity in the wake of Cyberpunk 2077, which sold players on a similar kind of non-linear transhuman fantasy.

The Guardians of the Galaxy find their way towards the top of our list of the best superhero games.

Read more:
Guardians of the Galaxy launch sales "undershot expectations" - Gamesradar

CPAC the Conservative Political Action Conference runs at the beginning of every year and its always an interesting event, to say the least.

Its often attended by Republicans, right-wing commentators, prominent media personalities and other right-wing activists. The event began in 1974, but has really picked up steam in the last decade, even more so after Trumps election. This year, its in - person at The Rosen Shingle Creek in Orlando, Florida. Speakers include former U.S. President Donald Trump, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, and Sean Hannity

On that note here are the top 10 of the most outrageous things which have ever happened at CPAC.

1. Member of Happy Science cult talks at CPAC 2021

Hiroaki Jay Aeba, a prominent Japanese conservative, will be speaking at CPAC 2021 he first spoke at the event in 2011. Aeba is the chairman of the Japanese Conservative Union, a right-wing political organization, and he helped found CPAC Japan, which has been running for the last four years in Tokyo. Seems above board - but Aeba is also a prominent member of the Happy Science cult, a Japanese cult who claims to be the incarnation of multiple gods.

2. Trump Jr makes #MeToo a CPAC joke, CPAC 2019

In 2019, Donald Trump Jr took part in a panel at CPAC, with other prominent right-wing commentators, including Charlie Kirk, who founded Turning Point, a right wing organisation catering to students and young people. Don Trump JR then suggested that Jerry Falwell Jr, one of the other panellists, should have been called Trump, (she was named Reagan). He then bizarrely said hashtag me too, which is almost unsurprising for Don Jr.

3. Diamond and Silk notice the last four letters of Democrats spells rats, CPAC 2020

Who could forget Diamond and Silk, two entertainers or right-wing commentators (its unclear what exactly they do), who have been Trump stalwarts since Day One. Theyre frequent guests on Fox News and InfoWars, and in 2020, they made a bizarre speech at CPAC where they pointed out that the last four letters of Democrats spelled rats, which is technically true but not really that noteworthy. They also pointed out that the last four letters of Republican spell out I can, which also just doesnt feel that special.

4. Trump admits that he isnt concerned at all about Covid-19, CPAC 2020

In 2020, CPAC was held just before the coronavirus pandemic caused states to lockdown. During that time, people were worried about potential superspreader events and even after people who had been at CPAC tested positive for Covid-19, Trump said that he wasnt concerned at all about the spread of the pandemic, which seems to have been an omen for darker times ahead.

5. Trump kisses a flagpole and mocks Greta Thunberg, CPAC 2020

In 2020, Trump kissed a flagpole and mocked Greta Thunberg during his speech, during which he also called prominent Republican senator Mitt Romney a low life. He also complimented Joe Bidens wife, while insulting now president Joe Biden, and then delved back into insulting the media. Pretty standard stuff for Trump, but it was still pretty bizarre to watch it altogether.

6. Trump admits he is balding, CPAC 2018

In 2018, Trump admitted during a keynote address that he was balding and that he does try a lot to hide a certain bald spot.

7. Ann Coulter upsets everyone, CPAC 2007 and 2008

Ann Coulter, the right-wing media personality, made several offensive remarks during her appearances at CPAC in 2008, but potentially one of the strangest was saying that the best thing that had ever happened to the campaign of Barack Hussein Obama was when he was born half black. The year before, she also called another media personality a homophobic slur.

8. Republican governor says he would rather go Waterboarding than listen to 70 political speeches, CPAC 2013.

While CPAC has been running for several years, media coverage of the event really started to pick up after Trump was elected. But previous years also had their fair share of controversy see Salons roundup of the most offensive remarks made on stage at CPAC 2013. The most outrageous of which might have come from Bobby Jindal, the former governor of Louisiana, who said that he would rather be waterboarded a controversial and common torture technique - than listen to 70 political speeches at CPAC, an event that he had chosen to both go to and actively participate in.

9. Nigel Farage and Marion Marechal-Le-Pen appear, CPAC 2018

Nigel Farage of UKIP and Marion Marechal-Le-Pen both spoke at CPAC in 2018 Marechal-Le-Pen warned attendees of the dangers of transhumanism, which is commonly used to refer to a movement of people who want to live forever with the aid of technology and science, but obviously wasnt what Le Pen was referring to. Farage took the opportunity to attack George Soros and praised Viktor Orban, the far-right prime minister of Hungary, for having the courage to stand up to him.

10. Organisers booed for asking attendees to wear masks, CPAC 2021

On the first day of CPAC 2021, when organisers told conference-goers to wear masks as they should at a primarily indoor event, they were booed off the stage. This is despite the fact that it is against the law to not wear a mask indoors in Florida at the moment, particularly in a gathering of the size of CPAC.

More: Marjorie Taylor Greenes despicable transphobic display proves she has no understanding of the Equality Act

Excerpt from:
10 of the most outrageous things that have ever happened at CPAC - indy100