# Human beeing



## moewe (Jun 9, 2001)

I#m sacrified about to be a human - when I'm looking around I think it's a shame to be one. Why people arn't satisfied? We have all a home , a roof over sheldering on rainy days, and nobody is hungry? What more is necessary? I'm happy about little things, because I know thats great to be healthy and fully. What do you think about that?


----------



## Matrix Agent (Jun 9, 2001)

I often think of life in terms of biology. To humans, consciousness is only the firing of neurons. Nowadays, it is not enough to have a roof  over our heads, food in our stomachs and clothes on our backs. People want to have their neurons stimulated, and they want them stimulated in a certain way. In America, we don't have a chance to go out and do what we want, we work hard for an education, then we work hard to climb the corporate ladder. There is no room for whimsy or exploration, we are a culture constantly moving into the future, without time to reflect on what has just happened. Those who stay behind are called "weak". But these people are the strongest, they are the ones who appreciate life. They found out what their "neurons" like d and they stimulated them so.

Like every person is different, so are there likes and dislikes. Many people today do not run there lives around these things though. The people who really live are the ones who find out what they like, and they just do it, pouring their heart and soul into it. Take, for example, steve wozniak, he had a great job at apple, he was free to do what he liked, to engineer. But he was free in more places than just his workplace. He felt that he needed to take a break from Job's purges, so he did.

Most people would say he was an idiot for leaving a high paying, exciting job, but he was smart. He had to gall to do what he loved, but to do it on his own terms. He put his life in front of his corporate career, something that few people are willing to do.

Well i rambled for quite too long, but who can explain life in short simple sentences? 
I'm sure your version is much more different than mine.


----------



## scott (Jun 10, 2001)

i may seem hipocritacal, but think about it - we are mammals. Humans seem to think that we are some God-given-to-the-earth creatures (I just opened a can of worms), but we.are.mammals.

Look at your personal behaviour. Eat. Sleep. Fight-or flight. Gimme a break. We are animals like the rest. People should realize that we are part of the so-called "chain" of life. Blah blah blah

Computers are no more a tool to us than fire.

p.s. I am a hunter, a fisherman ( I prefer fly fishing ) and far from an environmentalist, just a realist.


----------



## apb3 (Jun 10, 2001)

Scott:

I kinda agree with you. But computers are more to us than just fire. Sure it is a tool as is fire, but computers are capable of much more.

Computers can adapt/react/evolve/etc... When's the last time a fire said, "hey, I'm getting too big, better lower the flame a bit"?

Also, connecting with Matrix Agent's 'neurons' theme, computers can augment the human mind and even mimic (some say duplicate and do a better job of it at that) our thought processes. I don't want to get too sci-fi on you all, but my wife is a researcher at Harvard and I have some buddies at MIT's Media Lab and some of the things I've heard that are in development would blow you away.

We ARE just animals. But our minds and the tech that comes from those minds allow us to transcend our animal nature. I see a not too distant future where borg (I know, I'm a Trek Geek) like implants are commonplace.

At that point, let's have a discussion as to whether or not we are truly even human anymore.

This is interesting, please let me know what you think...


----------



## scott (Jun 11, 2001)

I agree with you too...

I came across a little too simplistic in my response. We are just animals, but we are on the cusp of becoming something so much more than just human, to quote.

Think of the pace we are setting. 20 years ago, nobody would have dreamed that a worldwide network of computers would become so commonplace and useful. VCRs took longer to take hold. I think that a mere 5 years from now we will look back to 2001 and be amazed at the simplicity of our current situation. A 3D internet, such as Adobe is working on, and a probably a merging of computer platforms (kinda like VHS vs. Beta?) - or even more probable an increase in embedded systems - are almost guaranteed. Further? Probably organic-based chips, etc. DNA processor?

Anyway, I agree with you about the Borg thing. 

On a slightly different line, I like Carl Sagan's ideas about space exploration. I think that we should be putting as much effort into space exploration technology as we do into information technology. Problem is that one costs a LOT more money than the rest, and space exploration can;t be 'open source' so to speak. Sagan's book "Pale Blue Dot" has good ideas on humans 'really being human anymore'


Let me know what you think...

Scott


----------



## AdmiralAK (Jun 11, 2001)

For a step back go to italy, or greece or some european mediterreanean country 

Aaaahhhh sit back at a piazza cafe, order a nice cold glass of coffee, sit and relax under the sun while you watch the world go by while you pay special attention to all teh beautiful women theat go by 

Aaaaahhh paradise  ... cant wait for july to come so I can go vacation 


Admiral

--> the 800th message!  To boldly post where no otherone has posted before ! <--


----------



## apb3 (Jun 11, 2001)

Thanks for the point to Sagan's book.


On the space thing...

I REALLY think we need to start getting all of our eggs so to speak out of one basket - Earth - and start getting at least our DNA off this rock. If a disaster of a global scale hit today, we're screwed. If we had - at least - a genetic bank on the space station, we could at least survive as a species. (I know we may run into problems with exactly who's DNA gets saved - wouldn't want Dr Mengele in charge of that project -  but I think we can work something out). 

To me, the DNA bank thing is just a small step in the right direction. We really need to get off this planet. Yeah, it costs money, it's dangerous, etc... But it'd be a new frontier much like the old west. LOTS of people died heading out west. But we settled this vast country. The vastness that this country represented back then to those settlers is very much similar to the vastness we would face heading out into our solar system.

And I'm just relating this settling to the old west. Imagine the hardships/risks of 'discovering' the new world. Maybe that applies to my example better.

Anyway, saw a thing on TLC or Discovery Science or whatever that dealt with the colonization of nearby bodies. There is NO reason why we can't do it - that was the point of the show. In fact, some NASA old-timers were stating it should have been done already (moon base first, mars next, etc..). All this would actually turn a profit fairly quickly, too. Mining asteroids, exotic materials, yada yada yada. Then if something did happen to the home world, we could back populate. It was kinda wierd hearing these NASA guys talking about this. I had been thinking about it for quite some time - and mostly getting laughed at for it...

I'd be the first to sign up as a pioneer. Guess it's the Icelandic in me - Vikings and all...


----------



## apb3 (Jun 14, 2001)

wow. ask and you shall receive...sort of.

check out this link


http://www.cnn.com/2001/TECH/space/06/14/cosmic.message.ap/index.html


as it sorta relates to my previous post.


----------



## scott (Jun 15, 2001)

I would think that sending our DNA out into space in such a large qty. might open us up to "someone" messing with it.

Seems a bigger risk than the benefits gained from "someone" being able to study our DNA.

I wanna go!


----------



## apb3 (Jun 15, 2001)

Like I said, I'd be the first to sign up to go. I want to be the one to go myself. Just posted that link as i happened across it and it does relate, as I said, 'sort of'


----------



## scott (Jun 15, 2001)

I agree with you completely. I was critical of the idea in the article, not whether you agree with it or not.

Funny how you start talking about things and they seem to happen or come into the public eye at relatively the same time


----------



## apb3 (Jun 15, 2001)

yeah. and hadn't thought it through really... do I want some aliens mucking about with our DNA to find some easy way to kill us or enslave our clones...? Pessimistic but that's me.

Another option to save our selves (If we should can be debated):

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/scitech/DailyNews/earth_orbit010615.html


----------



## moewe (Jun 17, 2001)

I read the article - particularly the last lines -  what is with the global warming up? 

It's a problem too close to talk about? 

Hey guys, you're all dreaming about some technical revolution - but I tried to talk about 

evolution! 

Illiterate children in the poor countrys around the globe don't become fully with this new toys! But here in Europa the adminstration is about to killing hundreds of thousends of cows, but max 3 percent are ill. The rest to ship to the poor is possible, but - what a pitty - to expensiv! 
Other agro-industrial trusts crushing tons of fruits with bulldozers for prizes holding on their position - perhabs they calculated the profit with such a new toy!? 

Thats really crazy - and you are talking about how to rescue our DNA! 

As long as our unit we are calculating in is only money, I think so, we never will become realy human.


----------



## apb3 (Jun 17, 2001)

I think it did get a little off topic. But, not much. Today, MANY technological revolutions are in my view human evolution.

You cannot separate the two anymore. My computer is an extension of my mind, extends my human abilities, etc... My grandmother's pacemaker keeps her alive. I wouldn't be able to function as a 'regular' human due to two war wounds. My partially artificial shoulder and completely artificial knee let me lead a life very much similar to my life before the wounds.

But I see your point. Just thought the article was interesting as it related to a previous post.

I think your comments about the injustices of the world as you perceive them have more to do with social responsibility (maybe 'social evolution') than human evolution, which, as you say, was that which you were attempting to discuss in this forum. I'm not complaining or flaming you or whatever. I feel topics getting a little off topic is inevitable and often a better way to see new sides to an issue. But if your gripe was that we were getting off topic, I color you guilty as well.


----------



## rof (Jun 23, 2001)

Aahhh, its good to read those posts.

Most of humans are so narrow minded. They think of them as being at the top of evolution. Think of those little bugs, they breed also worlwide as we do, and they evolute much faster as we do because the need only weeks for one generation, we need 30 years!!

So they must be the favourite animal on gods love-list.

-robert


----------

