I'm making a game about trains humanism types. What are options. What are options besides genetic augments, cyborgs...

>Eclipse Phase
Doesn't that have... weird stuff.
And plot holes.

Artifical worlds inside computers with mind uploading and shieeet

Nanobots that integrate with people and make them colonies of nanobots.

Humans becoming full infomorphs capable of downloading themselves in 3d printed, fully artificial bodys.

weirder than... radically altering your body, uploading your mind to a machine and even altering what makes you human?

mate if you're concerned by plot holes in RPG related media I sincerely recommend never reading anything fluff related ever

what a qt

>weirder than...
Well yes. Because your DNA makes your 'human'. Your processing parts make you 'a person'.

>trains humanism

From a transhuman standpoint you wouldn't bother even keeping your original body if the tech to make a new one was available. Physical bodies would become quaint fashion accesories or toys at best

Going on a tangent regarding your post, but this is what people don't often get about making a transhumanist setting. It's not "human but better", it's looking at the very concept of humanity and saying "LOL WHO GIVES A SHIT"

would eventually*

>3D CG instead of model trains

AHH IT BURNS, WHY HAVE YOU DONE THIS WHY!!!???

>they aren't physical models
what the fuck happened

>transhumanist setting. It's not "human but better"
It does depend on the specific timetable and setting.

But it's basically just regular evolution toward more survivable states. Ones which may not be conventionally human in shape.

i kno rite

>tfw no bald, slightly green qt with circuit board veins

"Not conventionally" human is a understatement. It's considering almost everything about the current human condition and saying it is all potentially disposable

Nature says that everything about every condition is potentially disposable. You adapt to make life better. You don't shout at nature and demand to be allowed to be left stagnant.

...

Personality backups. Just insert your consciousness into different bodies

Usually the point of getting on a chess tournament is to win at chess, not to toss out the chess pieces and play checkers instead

You could upload everyone into a big nigh indestructible computer where they would feel nothing but pure pleasure 24/7 and are otherwise inactive. You could make a self-replicating spacecraft that would turn anything it found into similar computers, except with "new" minds simulating reproduction. That'd be technically an end to human suffering, while fulfilling the basic "goal" of life by spreading orders of magnitude more than we could have in natural bodies

>trains
???

I got your actual purist faction mascot right here, OP.

>genetic augmentations
>full on non-human body
>non-genetic biological implants
>selectively bred superior race
>mechanical augmentations
>nanomachine augmentations
>full on synthetic bodies
>clones society
>mind uploads
>full on virtual reality
>hive mind
>religious purists
>swedish libtards

I'm not sure the point you're trying to make?

The future of evolution in a universe humanity still doesn't completely understand is almost certainly different than all those trite reductionisms you listed. That's just hollywood garbage.

I mean, you may as well imply that humans gave up on the game of fighting over African jungle fruit. It's meaningless.

I also like how shes very angular and completely hairless.

People who live their lives meditating and projecting themselves with psychic force alone.

He's right though, humans may be complex machines, but they are still machines in the end. The few things that drive them will eventually be easily satisfied, and what then? There's nothing left, humans define themselves by what they are not rather than what they are.

>The future of evolution in a universe humanity still doesn't completely understand is almost certainly different than all those trite reductionisms you listed
If you can literally have heaven and almost certain survival, why give a shit about any other option unless it's entirely out of whim?

>tfw born too late to be a cave walls shitpainter
>tfw born too early to be a psychic communion shitprojector
>tfw born just in time to be a mongolian impressions boards shitposter

That's clearly wrong though, as per basic evolutionary biology. The safety desire will never be satisfied so long as any part of the universe is left unknown and unexplored.

But to be honest, it's a physics issue. Life is an extension of how the universe operates. So answer: We'll figure it out with time.

I can already see the future user.
youtube.com/watch?v=HsvyjePPFRs

>The safety desire will never be satisfied so long as any part of the universe is left unknown and unexplored.
Unless I take this dumb human idea and rewrite it so I can carry on with my guilt-free mental masturbation

>Life is an extension of how the universe operates. So answer: We'll figure it out with time.
Are you high right now?

Except that basic desire can be overwritten, changed, deleted, or otherwise done away with in a million ways with technology, which is the entire point.

> Life is an extension of how the universe operates. So answer: We'll figure it out with time.
This means less than nothing.

Are you two sure you're in the right thread? This isn't "argue against transhumanism".

And both your arguments are really dumb. You've concluded that super-AIs of the future will prefer to masturbate. It's ridiculous.

A "superhumanist" faction that maintains genetic purity, but utilizes fullbody prosthesis to remain on par with other groups.

Basically, normal humans that wear plugsuits and only interact with others in various forms of mecha, whether that be in just their plugsuits, in powered suits, full mecha, whatever.

They have no qualm with utilizing AI, but their core tenant is that at the core of every decision is a purebred human, even if they have never undertaken a single action in their life under natural power.

At the core of their ideology is the supremacy of pure man, assisted by the products of civilization.

Check out the Quantum thief trilogy, it has some neat ideas.

Personally, I have always been fond of settings where humanity inhabits the solar system, but has diverged into multiple different "species" of humanity living in different parts of the solar system.

That keeps the setting somewhat grounded, but still quite high concept.

This book series has that sort of setting, with descendants of humanity living all across the Solar system, from Mercury to the friggin Oort cloud.

>Except that basic desire can be overwritten

Uhh, why would people do that?
>Remove survival desire
>Die
>Darwin laughs

People really believe this stuff?

>You've concluded that super-AIs of the future will prefer to masturbate. It's ridiculous.
if for masturabting we intend setting parameters that the experiencer deems fulfilling and achieving them multiple times in a controlled environment then yes, I can only agree with them

The point is that your guess at what super-AIs of the future is just as worthless as ours, because we're ants compared to what they would be. And valiantly struggling to survive in a cold and uncaring universe sounds like a very convoluted and inefficient course of action if you can masturbate forever and still survive

>Remove an anachronistic desire that makes people unhappy "so long as any part of the universe is left unknown and unexplored."
Gee user, I don't fucking know.

My theory is far superior to yours upon the tenets of evolutionary biology. Because yours is "lol they start masturbating forever".

The fact that you cannot fathom what motivations people of the future will have does not mean they will have none. The evidence of entropy at least shows they will have some.

That stops fucking mattering when you get at an advanced enough transhuman society. You can arbitrarily change any aspect of a mind so any experience produces any reaction you want. You're advocating transhumanism while also saying we should remain essentially human in some level

>and still survive
what if the superintelligence isn't happy enough with the limits a single imperfect universe imposes to a virtual reality in it?

>[ranting without any proof of what he is claiming]
I'll take that as confirmation of your inebriation

It could rewrite itself to not care. That would be the simplest solution.

You're both assuming the future creature will have the motivation to reduce its own survivability for human pleasures.

You're basically disproving your own argument. Why would it have the human pleasure desire you say it does?

>The evidence of entropy at least shows they will have some.
You keep saying these bullshit flowery statements which make NO fucking sense whatsoever and then when people call you out on them you change the subject. How about for once you properly justify your bullshit.

>Why would it have the human pleasure desire you say it does?
Why would it desire to retain human suffering?

"preferring to do X" and "doing only X" are 2 different things, user.

the point of that has been brought up is that the amount of masturbation will increase proportionally to the solutions found for easier survival, with a theoretical tendency of going full masturbation as the solutions near failproofness, regardless on whether they could ever be so.

survival is not an instinct as strong as the one for the research of happyness, anyway.

Because the reward drive is the central drive that keeps advanced biotic machines working and unlike other drives is not an active hindrance in a world that has gone beyond normal human needs. Removing the pathways for response to reward would result in an organism that cannot function , removing punishment pathways would result in an organism more adapted to it's new surroundings free of historic evolutionary pressures.

that would remove the point of BEING at all.

I actually find it weird that these threads attract Luddites who try to explain why future technology will be bad.

Just like you could chop your own arm off. Why would it do that?

Entropy implies whatever it desires to do will come to an end. Giving the implicit motivation to find a way to counter entropy.

Do you have the suffering of a chimpanzee or a protozoa? Conditions change, life changes to have different goals.

You are arguing for the absence of all goals but 'masturbation'. It sounds to me like an ignorant opinion.

Welcome to transhumanism

>I actually find it weird that these threads attract Luddites who try to explain why future technology will be bad.
I think you're projecting here.

Don't worry, we have hope far in excess of your religious defeatism.

They're classic disinformation trolls making assertions contrary to evidence. If you believe in evolution, there is always implicit motivation.

>Just like you could chop your own arm off. Why would it do that?
Because it would hurt and probably kill me, and I need my arm to do stuff. If I was practically immortal, invulnerable, chopping my arm didn't hurt and it opened the gates to a world of endless pleasure, besides giving me the capability to create a new appendage that is superior to an arm in every aspect I'd sure as hell chop my fucking arms

>If I was practically immortal, invulnerable,
But you won't be if you proverbially chop your arms off.

>a world of endless pleasure
A human chemical response. Which means you've disproved your own argument. :)

But this discussion may hopefully be of some service to the OP if he intends to put insane 'purists' in his setting.

>Do you have the suffering of a chimpanzee or a protozoa?
Essentially, yes. You've been saying as much this whole thread with your talk of basic biology.

>>Entropy implies whatever it desires to do will come to an end. Giving the implicit motivation to find a way to counter entropy.

>Time exists and causes thing to change, people don't want things to change, therefore people will in the future have the motivation to stop time
This is what your bullshit sounds like, not only is it practically impossible, but it's stupid to boot since it's built on assumptions that you yourself deny (That fulfilling desires [thus bringing pleasure] is the main thing that compels advanced life)

Read transhuman space.

>If you believe in evolution
I think you're approaching evolution with a finalistic point of view.
it screws with how it actually works.

>But you won't be if you proverbially chop your arms off.
But I have the newfangled superarm-2000 that can deadlift 200 tons, can scratch every spot in my back, knows how to play every instrument, is indestructible and has a reaction time twice as fast as a human arm, what do I need that dusty little thing for?

You're assuming the AI would be a single entity. It can easily make a lesser AI to take care of it while it masturbates, or a endless list of things to that effect

So you two, in modern times, you can take drugs that will keep you in pleasant hallucinations all the time. Why don't you do it? You can have your dreaming coma on life support.

Your theory for the motivation of transhuman creatures falls equally flat.

Survival is an underlying irremovable motivation of its core hardware upon which everything else is based. This is basic life-sciences.

>Implying there is a point

>You are arguing for the absence of all goals but 'masturbation'. It sounds to me like an ignorant opinion.

masturbation is used here as stand in for a positive response the brain gives to a certain situation it is prgrammed to react to; every single action a thinking entity does can be traced back to a stimulus like this, it is in fact the one and only goal these things have, while you assume it is the other way around with it being a mere mean with survival as a goal.

>survival as a goal
Survival is the goal of pleasure, pleasure is not the goal of survival.
That is empirically proven by evolutionary persistence.
If your species ever chose pleasure over survival, it would die out, and more intelligent creatures would take its place.

Am i weird for wanting to focus on the lower end of changes with transhumanism but get turned off by god AIs to which we are less that bacteria and minds being so flexible that every last part of one's personality will probably be rewritten the instant that personality is non optimal for the current situation?

>you can take drugs that will keep you in pleasant hallucinations all the time. Why don't you do it?
Because that's entirely and patently false. Not only is that proposed situation impossible without vast resources, modern drugs are vastly imperfect and fail totally at providing a complete lack of suffering or any real nuanced pleasure.

The case becomes entirely different when in a transhumanist age since all of those things can be had with no imperfections with a flip of a switch, or even a simple request.

>So you two, in modern times, you can take drugs that will keep you in pleasant hallucinations all the time
This isn't actually true. Most hallucinogens can be horrifying. Let's say you said heroin instead

I don't shoot heroin 24/7 because I have hopes and drams that aren't becoming a worthless junkie who will overdose in a couple days. However, if heroin was perfectly healthy and a hundred times more pleasurable, I retained my mental faculties in full, I was immortal, I knew my family would live comfortably for the rest of their lives and wouldn't miss me, I had hundreds of infallible servants on my service and I had already fullfilled all my life goals or at least had been made to think I had, why the fuck wouldn't I fall to that level of degeneracy, even if I find the IDEA of it abhorrent having never experienced it?

Are you retarded, or do you not realize that transhumanism does away with [undirected] evolution?

You can't have your cake and eat it too.

Not at all. Ghost in the Shell stuff can be fun.

Problem when it gets more advanced is the human writers don't understand it that way, so basic handwave it into fantasy colored by their modern philosophies.

For lower-end stuff, we have more practical fleshed-out understanding, so it gets less plushy and/or preachy.

>implying "points" aren't relative constructs
There technically is always a point as long as you see an imperfect system

pointlessness comes from trying to find the point for absolute systems

What if from within a relative imperfect system there are no first principles that lead to points being existent within the system?

Oh, and let's also said I had an infinite amount of this super heroin. Or let's also say this super heroin makes me relive the happiest moments of my life forever, a hundred times stronger than when they actually happened, and I never grew bored of it.

You're confused. Heroin isn't a hallucinogen, it's a narcotic, an opiate.
Hallucinogens aren't generally addictive, and there's little substantial research indicating there are long-term side-effects.

No it doesn't. There is always selecting pressure.

But you don't know what coma patients dream of, do you?
Your visceral aversion to it is simply because you are unwilling to trade survival for pleasure.
What if there was a flawless pleasure-coma drug? You'd have your human lifespan of pleasure, would you take it?
How long would you want to live like that, 200, 300 years?
See, what's wrong with your "they'll masturbate" theories yet? You just can't imagine their motivations due to your own present conditions, so you assume facts not in evidence.

>That is empirically proven by evolutionary persistence.
You can give a mouse a button that will send it orgasms and it will press the button to death
this is practically proven

survival is never the goal
the only reason anyone would reasonably want to survive is to experience stuff, aka seeking positive feedbacks, you said si yourself too.

Yes, I am aware, that's why I said he was wrong and switched to assume a perfect heroin-like drug instead

>You can give a mouse a button that will send it orgasms and it will press the button to death
You can overdose it on MDMA too.

>survival is never the goal
So you've revealed that you don't believe in evolution?

'Hacking' pleasure centers with drugs and buttons only proves the survival point further. It dies, doesn't reproduce, and thus crap like that goes extinct. Which is why you evolved not to be able to masturbate yourself into starving to death, obviously.

Veeky Forums-like hivemind operating individual drones from very small to humanoid to ships like quest threads

>What if there was a flawless pleasure-coma drug? You'd have your human lifespan of pleasure, would you take it?
You're essentially repeating our exact same fucking argument and reaching the opposite conclusion while also saying it is a counter-argument to ours

Right. The funny part is how you don't seem to understand that you're arguing against yourself this entire time.

Why would a transhumanist be motivated by pleasure when the survival instinct is far more foundational? Are algae motivated by human orgasms?

it's an absurd situation: imperfections are what generate the first principles.

>so you assume facts not in evidence.
You are so fucking oblivious it hurts. Time and time again you have insisted on the dumbest fucking bullshit, spouting shit at the drop of the hat, never fucking justifying it, and then seguing into the next half assed topic, insisting that your viewpoint is right, without a single argument to back it up.

Fuck you.

One of the basic assumptions we've made in this argument from its start over a hour ago is that the AI does not NEED survival instincts because it already has some form of nigh-infallible survival mechanism, so effective it can rewrite itself to masturbate for eternity and still be far more survivable and fruitful than anything even close to a humanoid form with a humanoid drive and emotions could ever be

You started this argument arguing for transhumanism, saying ALL aspects of the human condition are disposable if they become obsolete, and now you're arguing for preserving basic humanity even if technology makes it obsolete. Either that or you can't fucking read
You're seriously making me want to crack open some facepalm reaction images

>Come into this thread expecting work on a space opera setting focused on a galaxy spanning empire of sentient trains
>Everyone ignores the hilariously evocative OP
I'm disappointed Veeky Forums

>Your visceral aversion to it is simply because you are unwilling to trade survival for pleasure.
Lol what visceral reaction?
>What if there was a flawless pleasure-coma drug? You'd have your human lifespan of pleasure, would you take it?
Sure why not.
>How long would you want to live like that, 200, 300 years?
As long as possible, that's how life works, drug or no drug.

be willing to go weird, and I mean REALLY WEIRD

>No it doesn't. There is always selecting pressure.
Wow, great argument there faggot. In a transhumanist society, that is one that has had it's people become more than human, and in all likelihood done away with the basic human needs and requirements. One that's possibly even done away with traditional breeding, there is still selective pressure? How? It's a mystery, but you say so so it must be the case.

>the AI does not NEED survival instincts
Which is a fallacious assumption.
AI 2 from Galaxy 2 comes and kills it.
>it can rewrite itself to masturbate for eternity
Downright stupid. It rewrites itself not to care about masturbation instead.
>ALL aspects of the human condition are disposable if they become obsolete
They are, but the determiner of adaptation is evolutionary survival.

To wit: It's impossible to remove the survival instinct as long as you continue to live, because basic constituent processes continue it.

A concept I want to see more explored is while there's the people running around space with near indestructible robot bodies most people opt to just live in hedonistic vr fantasies with their minds uploaded to server farms in deep space or mega structure like a dyson sphere.