Jayjay
Contributor
- Joined
- Apr 7, 2002
- Messages
- 7,173
- Location
- Finland
- Basic Beliefs
- An accurate worldview or philosophy
I'd say it's closer to 50 years.Well, I was thinking some of column A and some of column B: push out the arc to the side while using the time to shed weight via consensual methodology, so that even if you don't splat, you might still be able to do a rolling landing.Better than the certain splat if you don't. You're going to have to shed an awful lot of weight (people) to get down to the point chutes work.Your solution to the falling problem is "push hard to the side and hope you fall into orbit"You are missing the point.There's no active population control, NONE, that does not involve genocide or horrible oppression and forced abortions.
You are missing the point.
Let me try it another way. Let A = the number of people on this planet. Let B = the number of people that this planet can sustainably hold. Is it or is is not possible to have a discussion on this forum about whether A>B without all the namecalling and lies?
B is under a million. It's early stone age technology. The breakpoint is flint--you have to go back to before flint tools because flint is not a renewable resource and at that tech level there's basically no mining. I would be astounded if we could cleanly descend to that point without a massive overshoot due to war.
Thus the only real survival for the human race is to advance technology to the point that a high tech society is sustainable.
We already have the <5 micron imaging technology in development to do the digitization task (it's tested on live rodents, just need to get it around a human brainstem now), the image analysis suites, and the hardware that can support the parameter sets it would output. It's a matter of maybe 2-3 years out before we are likely to see our first live mammalian brain digitization and replatforming (less for the destructive-scan version, since it just requires higher energy levels and less care of target survival), and maybe 4-5 years from human replatforming.
The process has too much information loss, even if you can take the image. Slicing brains and then scanning the slices only captures the connectome: the structure of the brain. The internal electric charge is lost, and a lot of people's minds is in that transient form.
In a few years we could probably construct a mind and run it on a computer, but it wouldn't be any particular person's mind. It'd be based on some sort of average of multiple brain scans, and would have to be taught and grown inside a virtual environment like a baby. The technology to do that is pretty darn close, but I think the main block is that it'd be considered unethical to experiment with human brains, even if they were completely simulated.