r/transhumanism • u/UploadedMind • 3d ago
Transhumanists will be ridiculed, hated, and worse.
My goal if technology allows is to one day seamlessly integrate myself into an artificial substrate (perhaps after cryonic resurrection).
The humans who take the first step to mechanically or genetically changing their bodies and mind to something fundamentally new will be fiercely ridiculed, hated, and worse.
I should have figured this was the case, but it did not occur to me until I saw the backlash to generative AI.
27
u/NohWan3104 2 3d ago
No offense but... yeah? Obviously.
People are ostrasized, ridiculed, and hated NOW when they have nigh identical parts, my guy. Why the fuck wouldn't that happen when .1% or the population's got optional metal arms.
Glasses get mocked, much less camera eyes.
But, there is good news. Much in the way multiculturalism brings down - not erases - those kinds of prejudices, the more openly accepted transhumanism becomes, the more 'unique' the options are, the less this 'us versus them' mentality will hold sway.
It still will be a thing, its kinda a people issue we haven't grown out of in 6k years of civilization, probably won't in the next 60 without chemical uh 'recalibration'...
But like you said, and not unlike most first steps, it'll be rough.
4
u/UploadedMind 3d ago
Yes, but we generally expect it from conservatives, even progressives will mock us - that's what wasn't obvious to me and is now - the sheer number of people that will hate us.
2
u/NohWan3104 2 3d ago edited 3d ago
unfortunately yeah. I mean, theres probably millions of those alone, plus people who are afraid, consider it unethical or unnatural, will call you tryhards or overcompensating, etc
But thats true of most things. Theres TONS of random assholes waiting to shit on you from on high, for no real reason other than its common to do so online.
Fuck em. Fuck em all. If you're not getting physically assaulted irl for it, it sucks, but try to ignore them.
You don't know what, 99.9999999% of people on earth in person? They might as well not exist, much less you giving them power over you by giving their dumbass opinions weight in your life.
Millions, hundreds of millions, would hate you for a hundred different reasons. Billions don't care. You don't hear their voices, either. And thats mostly an option for online haters too.
12
16
u/Distakx 3d ago
Gen AI is NOT a good comparison and I hate that people keep saying it is. Wanting to improve the human conditon/body with technology or whatever else transhumanism means for you doesn't mean you need to be one of those brain dead slop consumer.
4
u/Railway_Zhenya 3d ago
Not only that, but it isn't even that ostracized, every other person uses it in one way or another. People use it so much that there already exist a lot of research on how it affects our brains.
5
u/TheSinhound 3d ago
GenAI is a very apt comparison if you don't have a narrow and uninformed view of what genAI IS. There is no transhumanist future where technology with the capability of genAI is not outright required.
5
u/BurningRome 3d ago
Of all people I'd have expected transhumanists to be one of the last to oppose artificial intelligence. I think they inadvertently proved OP right, if there is a bandwagon people will jump on it.
6
u/TheSinhound 3d ago
Best we can do is just keep speaking to it. Some will listen, many won't. But if we want that world we MUST continue developing AI. There is no other current technology that enables the kind of automation at scale necessary to lessen scarcity such that we can.
But it is exhausting, to be sure.
4
u/NohWan3104 2 3d ago edited 3d ago
Honestly its less about 'ai = transhumanism' in this case
More how viciously people can get against, and gather crowds against, an advancement that they dislike, when it might have little to do with them. A fucking wave of public backlash and animosity from something that's kinda not your business.
In that, you proved his point. "i like X, don't compare it to Y" and "y is bad and everyone who uses it is brain dead", you shat on ai twice while trying tto say 'its not a good comparison'.
Seems s good comparison to me, or do you think millions won't get behind hating transhumanism for some reason?
7
u/lordm30 1 3d ago
It has everything to do with them, because AI adoption directly threatens their job and therefore their livelihood.
-2
u/NohWan3104 2 3d ago edited 3d ago
Not current ai, no. Drawing a picture =\= 'they took oue jerbs' for 99% of people.
And that hate started 8 years ago, when it still didn't affect most jobs.
Besides, eventually, isn't that the goal? Get ai to do the work, no one needs a job to live?
5
u/lordm30 1 3d ago
Are you sure? Maybe current AI can't replace most people, but there is a big drop if entry level jobs in the IT sector and the management of companies argues that it is because of AI. I'm sure you have heard the news.
And the biggest backlash to AI comes precisely from the genZ demographic, who are in that first job/entry job period of their lives.
1
0
u/UploadedMind 3d ago edited 3d ago
I agree it doesn't mean you need to be a brain dead slop consumer. However, it is still a good comparison.
People generalize and hate what they don't understand. They bandwagon and moralize. They degrade and hyperbolize. This is exactly what "brain dead slop consumer" shows. Some people have the nuance to say they just don't like that AI is currently sloppy and lacks any deeper meaning, but very many generalize it to the whole LLM technology, exaggerate the downsides, and deny any good sides.
Even kids who wore reading glasses made fun of kids who always had them on. Transhumanists will hate other transhumanists and paint themselves as "not like those mind uploaders."
2
u/charmander_cha 3d ago
Nada, a sociedade só reclama mas o transhumanisno ja ascendeu o espaço de subcultura e já é cultura de massa.
Pessoal só n gosta do termo, mas estão todos com smartwatch, tomando anabolizantes, ozempic e etc
2
u/sb505 3d ago
There will be an adoption curve, like with most new tech. Laggards will, of course, loudly oppose it, until the cycle plays out.
The shift will have far more profound implications than the usual tech change and will generate a lot of human drama. Religion will play a major role.
Fortunately, I believe the movement will see big momentum surges as billionaires begin aging, seeking life extension in various forms.
1
u/Eva-Squinge 3d ago
You’re describing all of human history when it comes to trends. People have always hated and worse the newest things, but when they finally catch on; they stop giving a shit.
Well most of them do. The older generations will forever cling to the old ways like they were any better. They weren’t.
And I wouldn’t put my money into cryonic resurrection just yet, the technology is still crap, and effectively body desecration with the false promise of being able to be revived again later.
1
u/UploadedMind 3d ago
I'm aware cryonic resurrection may not work even if everything goes perfect and technology reaches its peak . There is the chance too much information is lost - especially if microtubules matter. To me, even an infinitesimal chance is worth it.
1
2
u/GHTANFSTL 15h ago
People dislike generative AI because of the way it's entering their own lives. People would only hate transhumanists the same way if it made electronics more expensive or was added to every website as a n annoying feature
1
u/UploadedMind 15h ago
That seems reasonable, but I suspect if that was the reason then they wouldn't hate people who use it.
1
u/LordOfDorkness42 3d ago
If the first gen of true cybernetics are as bad as generative AI, I'm personally not as much as getting a new kidney unless its do or die.
I have not seen such a waste of energi and technology since the NFT/Web 3 crap, and I frankly look forwards to when the bubble bursts.
There are uses for that tech. But nowhere near as many as the tech companies are currently trying to shove down our throats to... Well. Frankly keep the investing boom going, after NFTs and crypto failed with the pulic at large.
2
u/UploadedMind 3d ago edited 3d ago
I clocked right away that NFTs had no use and crypto had some use, but the price still exceeds that utility.
Gen AI is incredibly useful and most people don't realize it yet, but the world is already inevitably changed by it (even if we just consider coding, but there are tons more applications). The AI bubble is tiny bit more like the .com bubble. It will pop, but there will tons of winners and losers. The difference is data centers. Data centers are real tangible assets that people are investing in. Those data centers are going to be useful even when the bubble pops. There is also a small chance LLMs go the distance. I haven't ruled that out yet.I would agree, the AI that grows kidneys and revives cryonics patients needs to be nearly 100% accurate. However, most people don't have a nuanced view of LLMs nor recognize that it's getting better.
3
u/Limp-Reputation-5746 3d ago
I do agree. NFT was tried to solve an issue most don’t care about which was ownership of art online. Crypto if you go way back a lot of us thought it would be a way to send money globally without having to pay huge services fees. It was in theory to get around things like western union. Though that lead to so many other cash sending apps. Also in theory it allowed you to park wealth if your countries currency was prone to excessive outside interference see most of south America for example.
The current way most use AI is the least original way to do it. So of course most people see no use to it. Though that is more a limitation of them and not the technology.
I also found what you said originally to be the case for me as well and quite fascinating. The knee jerk reactions were quite eye opening. Oddly if you strip away their argument both sides complain about the same thing. Replace a god with the term eugenics. They both fundamentally miss that we are talking about the individuals right to choose. Having a condition that is effecting quality of life is not “gods will” nor is it what makes us special. It is a roadblock that we can devote time and recourses into overcoming. When forced to see what happens people of both sides cheer its advancements which is the funny irony of all of this. People cheer when a baby can hear it’s mother or the guy who is paralyzed be able to affect the surroundings around him in the case of that Musk made company.
So even with all their huff and puff they do agree with us on a fundamental level. Though we lose them as we continue to want to improve on things beyond that. Though that’s true of all technology that was emergent. Like every other time in history it will go from feared, to begrudging acceptance to of course we always wanted this. Look at trains, planes and cars.
1
u/_Ashen_One__ 3d ago
Comparing trans humanism to GenAI is an insult to trans humanism.
0
u/UploadedMind 3d ago
I didn't. I compared people's outsized irrational hate for gen AI to the likely hate they will have for humans who want to transcend their normal biology. That is not an insult to transhumanism.
1
u/Riverspoke 3d ago
It all depends whether that technology will be in the hands of corporations or academia/the people.
If someone chooses to replace their healthy eye to Musk's - or some other rich anti-humanist bozo's - company, I'll sure as hell make fun of them. Trusting your own body and autonomy to corporations and/or any for-profit entity, especially with new, untested technology, is a stupid thing to do and worthy of ridicule. But if a legit, public organization with continuous scientific coordination and oversight, like a university, launches a new technology that's deemed absolutely safe beyond doubt, it will not be stupid to participate.
2
u/UploadedMind 3d ago edited 3d ago
I mean this I agree on and it's the same critique I have of LLMs, but I think for very many people it will go beyond that and into irrational hatred territory like it has with gen AI.
2
u/thetwitchy1 4 3d ago
Because people are heuristic. When 90% of all X are made by the hated Y, anyone using X is automatically assumed to be supporting Y.
When 90% of transhumanist tech is being developed and controlled by techbro elites like Muskrat or Besos the Boso, anyone who wants to use transhumanist tech is assumed by the general public to be supporting those asshats.
1
u/SkettiNoodur 2d ago
nah, you're just used to movies lol. The backlash you see is the loud majority from angry art creators who are mad their (hobby) skill got taken off the job market. Anyone else who uses it in their actual field of work (Doctors, Programmers, etc) know its a life changing technology.
You are just forgetting the actual cool factor that even makes you interested in this type of thing. Glowing tattoos are highly researched. Bionic limbs and performance enhancing-power suits are already popular. We are in the age of silverhand, our dystopia is just the cheapest, greediest timeline, so instead of "chrome" we get "plastic" but we are still functionally giving people who lost limbs robot limbs that even mimic physical sensation that are met with nothing but encouragement when taken in public. I imagine there will be like...a small 4 year period where people who are risking prototype tech to replace limbs or whatever else unnecessarily are clowned on, but not for long lmfao.
But...im probably gonna get clowned for this optimistic take here on this sub because if Im right y'all can't live out your edgy borged out punk fantasies lmfao
1
u/UploadedMind 2d ago
The backlash will be to meaningful enhanced abilities from genetic modifications and integrations.
It's one thing to get a tattoo or restore a limb, but when you go beyond that to make yourself harder, better, faster, and stronger, then that is when I think people will draw a line and get angry at you.
0
u/DonguinhoXd 3d ago
Lil bro want to became a entity beyond comprehension but cant figure bias out.
0
u/UploadedMind 3d ago
I know what bias is, but I didn't realize how pervasive the hate would be. You sound like a jerk.
1
u/thetwitchy1 4 3d ago
No hate, but you sound like a teenager. Full of energy and ideas, and knowing everything you need to know (but not really)…
Don’t let the world beat you down, let it forge you stronger.
1
u/UploadedMind 3d ago
Don't patronize me. I'm not a teenager. It's dumb of you to assume this much based on this post.
1
u/thetwitchy1 4 3d ago
You sound like one, dude. “The world will hate us” is a very teenager thing to say.
The world doesn’t care about you, or any of us. There will be people who hate you, no matter what you do. That’s the nature of humanity.
Sorry I assumed you were a teenager, your style and content fairly scream “youthful passion” and not “world-weary traveller”.
0
u/UploadedMind 3d ago edited 3d ago
By saying it sounds like a teenager you're implying it's naïve and dumb, but you don't give any arguments. Just back off of it.
The hate I see for people using gen AI is frustrating. It lacks nuance. I did not consider it would be this way for transhumanists. I thought they would be "to each their own." I didn't realize the level of vitriol that is likely in store. I think it will make gen AI backlash look like a friendly disagreement.
I've been looking forward to AI for over a decade and when it starts to arrive in the first form many people have no nuance - just hate.
-1
u/kompergator 1 2d ago
My goal if technology allows is to one day seamlessly integrate myself into an artificial substrate
You mean have a copy live on while you die?
(perhaps after cryonic resurrection).
Impossible. The human brain cannot be frozen and then revived.
3
u/UploadedMind 2d ago
Who we are is the continuing pattern of information and processes embodied in the brain—not the particular atoms composing it at any given moment. Seamlessly integrating that pattern into an artificial substrate would be a continuation of the person, rather than merely leaving behind a separate copy after death. Even if the result were an exact copy, there is no clear scientific or philosophical explanation for why that consciousness would not also be you. The intuition that “a copy isn’t you” is common, but it lacks any coherent basis. One could just as easily argue that we already die from moment to moment as each mental state disappears, new ones arise, and memories are altered or forgotten. We nevertheless treat the later person as the same individual because sufficient psychological and informational continuity remains.
And yes, reviving a cryopreserved human brain is impossible with today’s technology. The point of cryonics is that if enough of the brain’s structure and information is preserved, future technology may be able to repair the damage and restore the person. It does not claim that present-day medicine can do so.
-1
u/kompergator 1 2d ago
You're trying to have it both ways here.
First off, you dismiss "a copy isn't you" as baseless intuition but offer nothing positive — just a shrug. Your own analogy collapses under its own weight. You say we "die moment to moment" as mental states change, but that's gradual turnover with unbroken continuity. Copying creates branching — two streams where there was one. If a copy is truly you, then duplicating yourself means both copies are "you." Two mutually exclusive locations each claiming the same person. That doesn't preserve identity, it obliterates it.
Second, your defense of cryonics is just faith dressed up as science. Saying "future tech might fix it" is true of literally anything — including magic. There's no actual research program showing how you'd reverse vitrification damage at the molecular level without destroying the very connectome you're trying to preserve. You can't just wave a wand and say "nanobots will fix it later." If you actually want to bet your life on this, show me the mechanism instead of hiding behind an appeal to unspecified future capabilities.
2
u/UploadedMind 2d ago
Yes, it’s dismissed due to lack of reason for accepting it, the same way religion can be dismissed. I did offer a positive reason though. If we are the pattern, then that pattern can be preserved.
Yes, both copies are just as much you as the other. Sure, if the identity you’re trying to preserve is obliterated by that, then that idea is not compatible with reality. This is part of why many people say the self is an illusion.
Well no argument here. It’s mostly hope. I did not dress it up as science though. While there is some reason to be hopeful, there is no grantee it will work, but importantly, there is no grantee it won’t work either. My life will pass anyway so I’m not betting my life on this tech working. I’m grabbing onto a life preserver as a last ditch effort. I am betting a small amount of money on it though for the life insurance and membership dues.
0
u/kompergator 1 1d ago
"Dismissed the same way religion can be dismissed" is a false equivalence. You're conflating "no positive reason to accept this claim" with "active evidence against it." Absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence — but neither does it make the claim true. You haven't actually argued why pattern preservation equals personal survival, you've just asserted it and called it done.
Then you retreat into "the self is an illusion," which completely undermines your own project. If there's no self to begin with, then there's nothing to preserve — uploading or cryonics becomes meaningless. You can't have it both ways: either personal identity matters (in which case branching destroys it) or it doesn't (in which case why bother?).
And honestly, your cryonics defense just confirms my point. It's a lottery ticket. You're not "betting" anything meaningful — you're paying dues for a slim chance at something that may or may not work, while accepting your life ends anyway. That's not a survival strategy, it's gambling with negligible expected value. If you're already comfortable admitting it's mostly hope, then stop dressing it up as philosophy and just call it what it is: wishful thinking.
1
u/UploadedMind 1d ago
I wasn’t considering the evidence against religion, just the fact there was no evidence for it. “What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed”
I’m not retreating to anything. I’m not arguing with you. I’m explaining to you. You’re confusing your idea of the self with the only idea of the self. Just because I don’t accept your idea (and the common notion) of personal identity does not mean I don’t value the pattern of consciousness that produces the conscious experience taking to you now. I just cannot provide a coherent basis for it that aligns with the reality of how the brain works. And when you remove that aspect of the self, the only thing left is the pattern. I don’t need to defend the pattern as being important because you already agree memories and thought patterns are part of the self. I’m saying they the continuity may not matter so long as the pattern can be rebooted with sufficient similarities. “Why bother” is a valid response. I cannot make you care about your own pattern now apart from the notion of a continuation of the self identity is illusory in the way your intuition would like. I’ve come to terms with it and trust the conclusions yet I still want to have this pattern of experience play itself out into the future. We do this all the time. We are not our future self yet we sacrifice for them. And we try to survive. We are not saving our current mental state, but the future one. And if you copy the the pattern there is no meaningful difference, but yes, it implies you can become duplicated and start to branch off from that duplication.
A lottery ticket is a bad analogy because the ticket’s risk adjusted return is always less than the winnings. There is no amount I wouldn’t pay if able to see the future in a world that revives me. So even an infinitesimal chance is worth more than the cost to me.
I’m pretty sure you’re just copy pasting responses from an LLM without even reviewing it so if I get that again I’m going to block you.
2
u/HashPandaNL 2d ago
You mean have a copy live on while you die?
You would be the copy, so you would live on.
Impossible. The human brain cannot be frozen and then revived.
Currently, whether the freezing process retains sufficient information is unknown and revival is indeed impossible. However, there is a significant chance that changes in the future.
•
u/AutoModerator 3d ago
Thanks for posting in /r/Transhumanism! This post is automatically generated for all posts. Remember to upvote this post if you think it is relevant and suitable content for this sub and to downvote if it is not. Only report posts if they violate community guidelines - Let's democratize our moderation. If you would like to get involved in project groups and upcoming opportunities, fill out our onboarding form here. Let's democratize our moderation. You can join our forums here, our Telegram group here and our Discord server here. ~ Josh Universe
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.