Lifeboat Foundation

“…and on the third day he rose again…”

If we approach the subject from a non theist point of view, what we have is a re-boot. A restore of a previously working “system image”. Can we restore a person to the last known working state prior to system failure?

As our Biological (analog) life get’s more entwined with the Digital world we have created, chances are, there might be options worth exploring. It all comes down to “Sampling” — taking snapshots of our analog lives and storing them digitally. Today, with reasonable precision we can sample, store and re-create most of our primary senses, digitally. Sight via cameras, sound via microphones, touch via haptics and even scents can be sampled and/or synthesized with remarkable accuracy.

Continue reading “Vaccinate against B.S.O.D — Insure your Memories.” »

The answer to this question matters only to the degree with which the name of a movement or discipline affects how popular it becomes. While the actual meat of the movement or discipline itself matters more than anything else, I think a title can still have a non-negligible impact on how large an audience it is likely to reach. A title still matters insofar it determines whether or not the reader actually takes a look at the material underlying it — the real meat of the movement, discipline, study or what have you. A title may even be a larger determining factor in regard to whether the reader continues reading than the material itself is. If a title doesn’t catch a reader’s eye or pique their interest, or if it fails to effectively give a readily-recognizable indication of what it is meant to represent, then it’s likely that readers or viewers won’t even consider whether to continue reading on so as to discover for themselves the meat underlying the masthead. If a title doesn’t give a clear indication of the material it stands for, then most will simply pass over it. We come across too much material too regularly to read every article behind every ambiguous title we’re not sure what to make of.

Existential Risk is the far more prominent term, and this prominence would in itself bias the term toward being the best choice in regard to maintaining and gaining popularity and awareness, were we to leave all other aspects unconsidered. It is certainly the most predominant term, especially in the academic material the field has thus-far produced. And in no way do I advocate disowning it; this would risk the literature and material already associated with the term falling out of view. But there’s no reason articles, essays and papers can’t use other potential monikers, for their own set of connotations, while still harkening back to and citing material that uses the designation “Existential Risk” to prevent that.

Existential Risk does have the advantage of including not only outright extinction risks, but also risks that have the potential to “drastically curtail [Humanity’s] potential”. Nick Bostrom’s definition of existential risk encompasses not only scenarios involving the complete extinction of humanity, but ones in which the developmental trajectory of Humanity is “drastically curtailed”. In his 2012 paper Existential Risk Prevention as Global Priority [Global Policy, Vol 4, Issue 1 (2013): 15–31] he outlines a classification scheme for various types of existential risk: human extinction, permanent stagnation, flawed realization, and subsequent ruination. The definitions he gives for each class of scenario are summarized in the following table, taken from page 19 of Global Policy, Vol 4, Issue 1 (2013), © 2013 University of Durham and John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Continue reading “A Rose By Any Other: X-Risk, Existential Risk, or Extinction Risk?” »

A widely accepted definition of Transhumanism is: The ethical use of all kinds of technology for the betterment of the human condition.

This all encompassing summation is a good start as an elevator pitch to laypersons, were they to ask for an explanation. Practitioners and contributors to the movement, of course, know how to branch this out into specific streams: science, philosophy, politics and more.

- This article was originally published on ImmortalLife.info

Continue reading “Dirrogate Singularity — A Transhumanism Journey” »

Of the two images above, as a typical Science Fiction reader, which would you gravitate towards? In designing the cover for my book I ran about 80 iterations of 14 unique designs through a group of beta readers, and the majority chose the one with the Green tint. (design credit: Dmggzz)

No one could come up with a satisfying reason on why they preferred it over the other, except that it “looked more sci-fi” I settled for the design on the right, though it was a very hard decision to make. I was throwing away one of the biggest draws to a book — An inviting Dystopian book cover.

As an Author (and not a scientist) myself, I’ve noticed that scifi readers seem to want dystopian fiction –exclusively. A quick glance at reader preferences in scifi on sites such as GoodReads shows this. Yet, from noticing Vampire themed fiction rule the best seller lists, and from box office blockbusters, we can assume, the common man and woman is also intrigued by Longevity and Immortality.

Continue reading “Why does Science Fiction gravitate towards Dystopia and not the Utopia that Transhumanism promises?” »

This essay was originally published at Transhumanity.

They don’t call it fatal for nothing. Infatuation with the fat of fate, duty to destiny, and belief in any sort of preordainity whatsoever – omnipotent deities notwithstanding – constitutes an increase in Existential Risk, albeit indirectly. If we think that events have been predetermined, it follows that we would think that our actions make no difference in the long run and that we have no control over the shape of those futures still fetal. This scales to the perceived ineffectiveness of combating or seeking to mitigate existential risk for those who have believe so fatalistically. Thus to combat belief in fate, and resultant disillusionment in our ability to wreak roiling revisement upon the whorl of the world, is to combat existential risk as well.

It also works to undermine the perceived effectiveness of humanity’s ability to mitigate existential risk along another avenue. Belief in fate usually correlates with the notion that the nature of events is ordered with a reason on purpose in mind, as opposed to being haphazard and lacking a specific projected end. Thus believers-in-fate are not only more likely to doubt the credibility of claims that existential risk could even occur (reasoning that if events have purpose, utility and conform to a mindfully-created order then they would be good things more often than bad things) but also to feel that if they were to occur it would be for a greater underlying reason or purpose.

Thus, belief in fate indirectly increases existential risk both a. by undermining the perceived effectiveness of attempts to mitigate existential risk, deriving from the perceived ineffectiveness of humanity’s ability to shape the course and nature of events and effect change in the world in general, and b. by undermining the perceived likelihood of any existential risks culminating in humanity’s extinction, stemming from connotations of order and purpose associated with fate.

Continue reading “Faith in the Fat of Fate may be Fatal for Humanity” »

The following Futurist Poem was originally published on Transhumanity.net

One Child Closer to Trod

What beast lurks hidden

underneath this fleshless being

Continue reading “Futurist Poetry” »

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/12/121231180632.htm

Excerpt: “Galactic cosmic radiation poses a significant threat to future astronauts,” said M. Kerry O’Banion, M.D., Ph.D., a professor in the University of Rochester Medical Center (URMC) Department of Neurobiology and Anatomy and the senior author of the study. “The possibility that radiation exposure in space may give rise to health problems such as cancer has long been recognized. However, this study shows for the first time that exposure to radiation levels equivalent to a mission to Mars could produce cognitive problems and speed up changes in the brain that are associated with Alzheimer’s disease.”

It appears when Eugene Parker wrote “Shielding Space Travelers” in 2006 he was right– and all the private space sycophants claiming radiation mitigation is trivial are wrong.

Only a massive water shield a minimum of 14 feet thick and massing 400 tons for a small capsule can shield human beings in deep space on long duration missions. And since a small capsule will not have sufficient space to keep a crew psychologically healthy on a multi-year journey it is likely such a shield will massive over a thousand tons.

Continue reading “Cosmic Ray Gorilla” »

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/09/120905134912.htm

It is a race against time– will this knowledge save us or destroy us? Genetic modification may eventually reverse aging and bring about a new age but it is more likely the end of the world is coming.

The Fermi Paradox informs us that intelligent life may not be intelligent enough to keep from destroying itself. Nothing will destroy us faster or more certainly than an engineered pathogen (except possibly an asteroid or comet impact). The only answer to this threat is an off world survival colony. Ceres would be perfect.

“The more anxiety one produces, the more the discussion there would be about how real and how possible actual existential threats are.”

John Hunt recently queried me on what steps I might take to form an organization to advocate for survival colonies and planetary defense. His comment on anxiety is quite succinct. In truth the landing on the moon was the product of fear– of the former Soviet Union’s lead in rocket technology. As we as a nation quelled that anxiety the budget for human space flight dwindled. But the fear of a nuclear winter continued to grow along with the size of our arsenals.

Interestingly, at the height of the cold war, evidence of yet another threat to human existence was uncovered in the Yucatan peninsula of Mexico in 1981; Chicxulub. But even before the dinosaur killer was discovered, perhaps the greatest threat of all to humanity was born in 1973 when Herb Boyer and Stanley Cohen created the first genetically modified organism. The money to answer both of these threats by going into space continues to be expended by the military industrial complex.

Mile wide rocks in space and microscopic organisms on earth are both threats to our existence, but the third and undoubtedly greatest threat is our own apathy. Why do we expend the tremendous resources of our race on everything BUT keeping it from going extinct?

Continue reading “Christian Astronomers” »