Um, yep. Why do you mention it?

"I'm curious what it is about the movement you disagree with."

Everything I literally don't know where to start.

Horrible, but possibly inevitable. We already use computers so much, is it so much of a stretch to put them in our brains? Especially if you've been playing on an iPad since you were a baby?

To clarify I'm more talking against the "conquering death" or humans becoming less human. I'm all for being able to do a google search from your brain or whatever, but the creating a new transhuman entity shit is crass at best and terrifying at its worst

How could we still be human when we have access to the totality of the world's knowledge inside our brain?

We already have access to a lot of it. The difference in humans is in which parts we want to access. Some people play MMOs, some people read War and Peace.

If you had Google in your mind why would you need to go to school? Why would you ever need to ask another person a question?

It would completely change the human condition.

For all those that were wondering, SYnapse rejects all forms of medical care, up to and incuding simple aspirin for a headache. As an advocate of not working to extend human life, SYnapse rejects all forms of medicine and/or any form of artificial therapy to extend life.

SYnapse reject cancer treatment, surgery, x-rays -- after all, viewing the insides of one's body to determine the cause of pain is certainly an unnatural occurrence, correct? Oh...and those babies that are born pre-mature and we stick them on a ventilator or in an incubator...best to stick 'em in a field and let 'em die...maybe eaten by the animals to return to the circle of life. because forcing our medical technology on them to cause them to live is immoral.

Would this be an accurate statement, SYNapse?

That's not what transhumanism is. He may believe all that, I don't know, but then transhumanism is the wrong word.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism

Yes. Curing cancer creates starvation, as an example. If we cured cancer and AIDS tomorrow it would be a death sentence for the human species.

However, if you're implying that I'm a technophobe, that's not correct.

Invictus, we still ask people things about what we read on google. We would also communicate together (with less speech)

OK, so SYnapse is the kind of person we can ignore.

"Invictus, we still ask people things about what we read on google. We would also communicate together (with less speech)"

If you don't think having your thoughts meshed into the internet would be completely different than what we have now there's no point talking to you.

@SYnapse - you are a technophobe, or at least should be.

If you reject the cure for disease because of it's ability to cause more humans to live longer, then you'd best reject all technology.

I'll just pick a few at random:
Furnace - allows people to easily survive deathly cold
Automobile (including all engine-run machinery) - allows for easy production of food, and transport of food. Allows for easy spread of technology. All of whcih makes life easier, more survivable
Phone - convey information easily across distance, allows spread of information to save lives (for example, calling for help when someone otherwise would die naturally)
Lights - Allow for extended time of productivity, again, easier more survivable life
Machinery - obvious - mass production of good, including farming equipment and clothing, making life easier and extending life through fewer hardships.

Shall I go on? Tell me how any technology is not counter to your goal of reducing humanity?

I reject the cure for disease because it would cause more humans to live less, or consequently less humans to live.

Run a small simulation of birth/death rates and take out cancer and AIDS deaths. See how long civilisation lasts.

It's awesome when the Libtards start freely expressing your perverted beliefs.

And yet the irony is that fucktard SYnapse supports Obamacare.....what a fucking idiot.

To clarify I'm not a liberal.

You're an idiot and a fucking hypocrite.

SYnapse - Uhhhhh...yes you are. Do you support Obama, Obamacare? Did you Support Obama and the Democrats in the recent shut-down fight?

Guys, you're attacking something, but the thing you're attacking isn't transhumanism. Transhumanism isn't about using a furnace to keep warm.

@ Invicus: "If you had Google in your mind why would you need to go to school?"

Because school isn't just about learning to memorise facts - or it certainly shouldn't be. School is about learning how to interpret and use information, not just about memorising data. School is also about learning to be part of society. Google can't provide everything, nor should it.

@ SYnapse: You're a liberal in Krellin's eyes, because to Krellin "liberal" just means "someone Krellin doesn't agree with".

"Run a small simulation of birth/death rates and take out cancer and AIDS deaths. See how long civilisation lasts."

Lets run a small simulation where we give Synapse cancer and see how long his posts last.

@Jamie - it's a strong indicator that you are Liberal, yes...just like if I disagree with you in most things that indicates I'm probably of an opposite political persuasion. What's you point?

Why don't you let SYnapse answer the question about his recent political stances and we'll have an indication if I'm right, OK Jamie...

@Jamie - of course a furnace isn't transhumanism. But his issue with tanshumanism is taht he doesn't want life extended by artificial means. So...I'm applying his desire (stop extending human life) to other technologies to see if he has a consistent philosophy.

He doesn't object to making humans better (i.e. google-in-the-brain) - he objects to longer human life via technology that modifies humans. Well, I submit that surgery and medicine modify your natural human state...and if you reject that, then let's just take it a step back and see if he's a true technophobe....or if he is of a wavering mind who inconsistently applied his desire for shorter human life.

"Because school isn't just about learning to memorise facts - or it certainly shouldn't be. School is about learning how to interpret and use information, not just about memorising data. School is also about learning to be part of society. Google can't provide everything, nor should it."

Our thoughts, though, are just chemical reactions in our brain. The soul, should it exist, has no physical manifestation. If we find a way to integrate our thoughts with the internet we'll already "know" everything, making education superfluous. Now, maybe there would be socializing centers, but there wouldn't be "school" in any form we would recognize today. That's a dramatic change from the entirety of previous human history. How can you not appreciate that?

Again, I only think this is "possibly inevitable." Much like how laws have put the kaibosh on human cloning, laws could stymie this area of research as well. Let's hope so.

Invi - depends on the level of integration. "Thought access" to a google search is far different from instantaneous comprehension of every topic.

Trust me, I've started at plenty a calculus problems, differential equations, electro-magnetics theory, etc while an engineering student and even though I could work the equations (usually...) I certainly wouldn't say I had comprehension.

If we get to the point where this is really possible, we won't be mentally typing letter by letter into a search bar in our imagination. I can't imagine there would be anything besides perfect integration.

IBM's Watson has the equivalent of "thought access" to Google. Its great for Jeopardy, but comprehension, synthesis, and analysis are out of the question.

@ Invictus: "If we find a way to integrate our thoughts with the internet we'll already "know" everything, making education superfluous."

Again, though, education is not just about "knowing things".