UUGGHH
This is yet another example of a
NON-Science story being published by a low-grade paper as if it held some scientific news or even fact. They do this because it's a lot easier and cheaper than keeping people on salary who might actually have enough familiarity with the state of science to recognize a real scientific development (or "leap") if they came across one. Instead they'll pay some guy $100 with an online degree in
Futurology (I took that from the article -- go look) to give them a handful of absurdist quotes like:
Quote:
|
"If you're rich enough then by 2050 it's feasible. If you're poor you'll probably have to wait until 2075 or 2080 when it's routine."
|
Quote:
|
"If you draw the timelines, realistically by 2050 we would expect to be able to download your mind into a machine, so when you die it's not a major career problem,"
|
Quote:
|
"We will spend a lot of time in virtual space, using high-quality, 3D, immersive, computer generated environments to socialise and do business in,"
|
WTF does any of that have to do with HOW one might actually achieve this magic
brain-to-digital transfer.
At this moment, what we understand about how the brain's storage operates is actually HANDICAPPED by our advances in computer science -- because, now, we're looking ONLY for the signatures of binary logic systems when we scrutinize the functining of our own heads, thinking our INVENTIONS equal to DISCOVERIES OF HIGHER TRUTH -- LOL -- That's a whole new way to be arrogant for us -- LOL.
Once, we
enlarged ourselves (when we could not fathom the answer) by finding the Divine inside the Human. Now, we are (for not being able to fathom many answers)
reducing the scope of all that we may yet see, appreciate and understand -- so that it will fit comfortably within the systems of what we already know. Sorry to rant -- but that shit pissed me off!
j-
Thanks Dr. Pearson --
