I'm of the opinion that the essential characteristics of humanity are in fact the products of an easing of competitiveness. Art, literature, etc, I see as a form of dead-weight loss that humans can afford due to their obvious monopoly on a certain level of intelligence/fitness.
-
-
It's complicated. I'm not opposed to all value changes, but I fear we play a game of chicken where the further we get from the ancestral environment the more likely there will be a discontinuity in values. There are two competing rates, rate of environ change and rate of adaption
-
When the rate of environmental change is large compared to adaptation rate, the species will suffer or it will transform (and potentially have very different values). I see the age of Em scenario as a bypassing of the limits on adaptation (through evolution). (cont)
-
When we can add/delete genetic/neural-architecture code with the press of a button I don't expect continuity with human values. I think stripping oneself of non-productive components will give a competitive advantage greater than any pressure to remain broadly-human in this env.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.