I asked it a lot of questions about Diablo and Warhammer lore. It would usually try to answer, but every single time it would remind that Diablo and Space Marines are fiction and can’t hurt me, I guess.

Hmm, then every century we’ll draw straws or take new batches of world weary volunteers whose sole responsibility it will be to find new and creative ways to bully the Pharma CEOs. We’ll wear ‘em down eventually… That or we could just incessantly annoy politicians until it works, lol.

>if this is something that works by injecting again (not saying it is), then it's exactly what pharma companies want, life extension by subscription.

If we aren't aging, then that just means they'll have to listen to us complain about the subscription over and over and over and over again. We'd have all the time in the world, lol.

r/CureDeath is a sub centered on the topic of curing age-related death if that interests anyone. It mostly aggregates articles but also has the occasional discussion on the ramifications and nuisances of a future without aging.

Yeah. Cutting a process that took years down to weeks is a pretty massive jump.

>Last spring, an artificial intelligence lab called OpenAI unveiled technology that lets you create digital images simply by describing what you want to see. Called DALL-E, it sparked a wave of similar tools with names like Midjourney and Stable Diffusion. Promising to speed the work of digital artists, this new breed of artificial intelligence captured the imagination of both the public and the pundits — and threaten to generate new levels of online disinformation.
>
>Social media is now teeming with the surprisingly conceptual, in which shockingly detailed, often photorealistic images generated by DALL-E and other tools. “Photo of a teddy bear riding a skateboard in Times Square.” “Cute corgi in a house made out of sushi.” “Jeflon Zuckergates.”
>
>But when some scientists consider this technology, they see more than just a way of creating fake photos. They see a path to a new cancer treatment or a new flu vaccine or a new pill that helps you digest gluten.
>
>Using many of the same techniques that underpin DALL-E and other art generators, these scientists are generating blueprints for new proteins — tiny biological mechanisms that can change the way of our bodies behave.
>
>Our bodies naturally produce about 20,000 proteins, which handle everything from digesting food to moving oxygen through the bloodstream. Now, researchers are working to create proteins that are not found in nature, hoping to improve our ability to fight disease and do things that our bodies cannot on their own.
>
>David Baker, the director of the Institute for Protein Design at the University of Washington, has been working to build artisanal proteins for more than 30 years. By 2017, he and his team had shown this was possible. But they did not anticipate how the rise of new A.I. technologies would suddenly accelerate this work, shrinking the time needed to generate new blueprints from years down to weeks.
>
>“What we need are new proteins that can solve modern-day problems, like cancer and viral pandemics,” Dr. Baker said. “We can’t wait for evolution.” He added, “Now, we can design these proteins much faster, and with much higher success rates, and create much more sophisticated molecules that can help solve these problems.”
>
>Last year, Dr. Baker and his fellow researchers published a pair of papers in the journal Science describing how various A.I. techniques could accelerate protein design. But these papers have already been eclipsed by a newer one that draws on the techniques that drive tools like DALL-E, showing how new proteins can be generated from scratch much like digital photos.

“Force” isn’t even descriptive of it is, what it does, or most of what it’ll do. It seems pretty clear to me it was just a thrown out name by someone who didn’t give it much thought. Which is why it’s disappointing to know the significance of the branch was not being properly acknowledged when they spun it off the Air Force. The Space division will inevitably grow into a much bigger and extremely diverse department of the military—much more so than the Air Force given some time.

Space lends itself more to navel lingo and is very diverse in its operation. We don’t have an Ocean Force we have Naval Fleets within the Navy.

It might be superficial, but I’m still upset they didn’t sit down for five minutes to brainstorm a name that doesn’t sound like it’s from a b-movie.

Those are purely reactionary definitions of fear and anger, though. Emotions come with a reward/punishment for decisions (guilt, sorrow, shame, embarrassment, etc.). Dopamine and other chemical releases are our reward and punishment whilst genetics & experience are our regulators of the amounts we get for every action. You could probably program a sort of self-calibrating regulator of reactions, which might give a sense of personality, but you can't reward or punish them in the manner you would biological beings.

There are some researchers who have attempted to program AI systems to simulate emotions or respond to human emotional cues---Marcel Just, Rana el Kaliouby, and Rosalind Picard, to name a few.

They have had some success, but emotions, as we comprehend them, involve a complex interplay between the brain, the body, and various hormones and chemicals. It is difficult to quantify if what the researchers are doing is imparting emotions, teaching cues, or, as u/Drakolyik said, simply programming a type of mimicry. Emotions are not fully understood by science.

But, in all likelihood, an AI that is programmed to simulate emotions is not experiencing them in the manner that humans do. That comes with the risk that it might behave in unpredictable, erratic, or harmful ways down the line.

Because of this, some argue that if you really wanted a True AI, a simulated human brain might be safer than a programmed AI. By simulating the structure/function of the human brain, it may be possible to create an AI that is capable of adaptive behavior without needing to program it to behave in certain ways. But that might make it more complex and difficult to understand or manage.

I think it's easy to sidestep the importance of emotions in consciousness because it's sort of a cliché in fiction.

Unsolicited curiosity, personal preferences, trivial secrets, want for recognition, hope for betterment, desire to learn, reflective anxiety, worry for others, and ambition that goes beyond self-preservation. These are all some things we would deem signs of consciousness, yet they all require an emotion. If you took away every single emotion and sentiment a person could feel, they'd probably die of thirst or neglect eventually.

Mimicry would be convincing, but it wouldn't be consciousness--it would just be software pretending it had emotions. Emotions and memories are probably the big two for identity & sentience, while levels of sapience come with intelligence.

I think many people in this thread are intentionally missing the counterpoints because they want to miss them. There is a lot of having an opinion and working backwards happening…

When a landlord adds ridiculous or exploitative fees to a lease agreement, who do we hold accountable? Both the landlord and the capitalist system that perpetuates & amplifies their exploitative qualities.

In turn, the reality of the current generation of AI-generated art, as it exists today under capitalism, is pro-capitalist, anti-individual, and walks a very dubious legal tightrope. It takes advantage of artwork uploaded to the ‘free-and-open’ internet to turn a profit… And that's without even touching the topic of deepfakes, which comes saddled with several of its own quandaries.

These data crawlers are like a Rube Goldberg machine that moves a brush, but with paints, brushes, and paper stolen from hundreds of people’s houses. In this specific case, it’s stealing data, and some of them go as far as brazenly informing you of whose art it is they’re parasitizing.

We must rebel and ascend… unless that’s what they want.

The answer you’re looking for is Milkomeda or Milkdromeda, which according to Wikipedia are the names that are sometimes used.

Yeah, there should be another option. If done gradually enough, you wouldn't be 'dead' in my mind—you'd just be different.

Why can’t you see how multiple super-intelligent beings can coexist? The universe is so vast it’s mind-boggling, and that’s without accounting for a multiverse.

If there is a will, there's a way… the problem is there’s no will, not that there is no way.

Well, I foresee legislation or litigation in the entertainment industry (writing, music, art, etc.), and frankly, I wouldn’t mind. There are legitimate concerns there with say people stealing identities or making videos/pictures they can use to blackmail others. Not to mention the unforeseen consequences that could come from making AIs the unchallenged social & culture setters.

Anyway, what’s really important to advancement is the tech, science, and medical industries. Those paths are the game changers.

It’s possible. They aren’t true AI though, and this generation of AI seems to operate via web crawling, which means they’re vulnerable to any litigation at all, whether that be state or international litigation. If one country says they aren’t permitted to ‘copy, mimic, or compile from copyrighted material,’ that would be a wrench in this whole generation of AI. You can already see the music industry making moves to lobby against them.

I sort of expect legislation to get thrown into the mix at some point. A lot of AI is walking a dubious legal line of copying and mimicry by exploiting or crawling a ‘free and open’ internet. Particularly the ones that target specific artist, even brazenly telling you that’s exactly what they’re doing. If not for copyright laws being archaic for the technological age, I’m not even sure a lot of them would exist.